Punish the Deed not the Breed - But How? Discussions

Stop it! You will dampen my cool exterior and spoil my weekend!!

Just goes to show how some people agree with eachother on one subject and not another.
Dawn.

You know I'm joking Dawn Ailsa and I continuously disagree but manage to agree at the same time if that's possible, I think we just like debating and playing devils advocate at times.

We have to work out solutions to such situations. I'm not saying I have all the answers, we only started discussing this whole thing yesterday. We need people like you to come up with viable solutions. If you don't think any of the proposed ones will not work, please take the time to come up with your own proposals.

Well actually, the law can dicate what you should and should not do. If these were law you and everyone else who wants a dog would have to abide by them. I for one am happy with that because I feel it will save a lot of dogs from misery. But like I said, please feel free to come up with your masterplan, we're all ears.

Where did I say those were the be all end all reasons? But in response to your point, I doubt very much the last few 'accidents' were down to dogs being born that way. You more than most should appreciate how much training and upbringing plays an important role in how dogs end up.


Still waiting on this one...

C'mon, please do share - while I have no problem with people discussing proposals posted, it's only fair that you rack your brains and come up with possible solutions too - otherwise this is a wasted section and these threads may as well go in the discussions section.

At the moment I am posting defending the proposals already made - please try and get back on topic:

Give us your proposals/ideas/solutions to the problems we face.

I know many of you love a good debate - but lets please use this section constructively, its for those who want to 'help'

Please do. I want to hear your solutions, I'm all ears.

I'm fed up of the way dogs are treated/killed and lead miserable lives, and if something's not done, instead of 2 dogs being killed everyone hour in the UK, it will double or triple or worse.

I think it's easy to sometimes forget what's going on out there, we're a bit cocooned on Dogsey because (thank god) most of us really love our dogs and give them a best possible life (so that's all we see). However there is a much darker world that some dogs have to live in, I just have to go out on a walk to see it sometimes :-(

I agree with all of this.
I am average ( I know it's hard to believe but i really am!!! :smt002 ) I have a massive choice of trainers in my area that I would go to if necessary...but i don't...
Example...if I had a puppy of my own that I wanted to take on a training course within 10 miles of my home I have a massive variety of trainers to choose from.
I can go to a friend who is an APDT trainer and is fantastic..I can go to a dog agility/obedience class, not quite as fantastic, I can go to 2 different 'dog dispaly 'team classes, I can go to a class that isn't as 'right on' as I would like it to be....there is sooooooooo much choice. I could go to a good or a bad trainer to be honest. Who decides where I go so I can keep my pup? Who decides what I learn and who decides if I have learnt it adequately????
My pup may pass a test on Monday but fail it on Tuesday... Also, you know what, some people just ain't academic or bookish. They may have all the practical and hands on dog experience in the world but may not be able to get it down on paper. What about them???? Who decides if I am good enough to have a dog??? Sorry I just don't see how it would be workable or how a universal 'test' could be designed let alone implemented.
Another query...a terrier is different to a retriever or one of the guarding or herding breeds. So do you have to do a specific breed or group test????
A working dog will be different to a pet....people who show will need to know different things to pet owners...the list of problems with a 'test' is endless when you sit and think about it.
Sorry.
I rambled...not like me...sort of thinking as type...can you tell!!!
As Trouble said...the people who's dogs have caused problems aren't average and probably wouldn't sit the test anyway...

I agree totally with the last paragraph Azz..but I don't see that a test would solve it for those dogs.

Az said
Well actually, the law can dicate what you should and should not do.
If that were the case we wouldnt be having this discussion.

I dont believe telling people what they can and cant do will do any good whatsoever, pass a law by all means, but its only the responsible that will abide by it.


Re: bad dogs and accidents. Dogs are born bad, and a breed like a Pit Bull is ever more likely to turn than a breed such as a Cavalier because of the very purpose it was designed for, it wont matter what you train it to do Az, a breeds natural characteristics and instinct will surface at some point and it may or may not do terrible things when that happens.

Personally I have no problem with a blanket muzzling in public program, wouldnt concern me in the slightest, I also have no problem with lead walking only, however this and nothing that has been suggested will stop a dog attack in a private home thats sparked off for whatever reason. If people, I mean normal everyday folk as well as experienced dog owners could predict an attack we wouldnt be seeing them, I think its unwise to think that we can control an animal in a 100% way, we cant they are animals, and as these severe attacks of late have been on private property I dont think any training or socialising programs will help in the slightest.
Dawn.

I think we have given suggestions but they are not necessarily to your liking.

I think anyone owning a dog of any breed should be legally responsible for their dogs actions, and held accountable.

I like many others think there should be legislation to stop puppy farming.

I think the laws we already have should be enforced, and until they are, introducing new legislation is pointless. We already have all the laws we need to improve matters.

I agree that compulsory micro-chipping is workable but it would need to be free in some cases. All dogs should be routinely scanned whenever they visit a vet and records updated. All dogs impounded or given up to rescues should also be chipped if not already found to have one.

I think if someone makes a complaint about a dogs temprement, the dog should be temprement tested to evaluate the case.

Dog fighting is already illegal, so is owning a dangerous or out of control dog. Cruelty to animals is already an offence.
What else is involved in the dark side Azz?

Thats wrong, according to statistics from temprement tests, pitbulls are equal to a Golden Retriever

Your branding breeds, a pitbull can be just a good a pet as a Cavalier

I dont see why anyone should get their pet chipped for free, and everybody else has to pay :? At the most a chip costs £25, surely if people cant afford that they shouldnt have a dog in the first place because if something happened to the dog they wouldnt be able to pay for vet fees

Lots of people use the pdsa and do get treatment for free or at a reduced cost if they can't afford it. Homeless people have dogs, would they be excluded from the chipping scheme. The way I see it is if you start to make exceptions to the scheme it would become pointless surely.

I am about to do the unthinkable and agree with both Trouble and Dawn in the same post. Once i have done this I am going to go and sit down and have a stiff drink to recover. :smt002

I agree with both of their posts.

We have legislation covering dangerous and out of control dogs, it's not enforced. there is no way we can stop more dangerous and out of control dogs happening...there will always be dangerous dogs, of any breed, always.
Dogs are just that ...dogs. they are animals and as such are not entirely predictable and we should NEVER sit back and relax and think that our dogs would never ever hurt or injure us or anyone else. we should always be on the lookout for any indication of trouble. They are dogs.
Don't get me worng, I love and adore my dogs and wouldn't be wthout them but I would never ever trust them 100%. If people ask if they are friendly with other dogs, I say 'normally', I watch them around my son and vice versa. There is legislation in place for seriously dangerous dogs though but it is not enforced. I am not talking about the BSL aspects of the DDA I hasten to add, I'm discussing dangerous breeds of any type.

Unhappy dogs...this is a bit ambiguous. Neighbours have a young collie. They are elderly (the man is 70+) the collie is young. They say she was the wrong choice of breed because they can't wear her out. They exercise her a lot, play with her a lot and adore her. Some would say she is unhappy as her brain isn't being exercised enough blah di blah...is that what you are talking about??? These people would pass every test and home check you could thwo at them though...don't think any legislation could stop 'unhappy dogs'.

As for the unhealthy dogs and dogs being destroyed bit. Gosh. Talk about vast.
If you had the answer to that i think you would make a lot of money.
I don't think those problems will ever be solved in all honesty.

PDSA is the UK's leading veterinary charity, caring for the pets of people in need. We provide free veterinary treatment to more than 4,650 sick and injured animals every working day and we promote responsible pet ownership.

So if people can use PDSA to get free or reduced treatment why would anyone need free chipping.

For the same reason they need free or reduced vet treatment?

No you misunderstand, a Pit Bull Terrier is far more likely to do incredible and fatal damage than a Cavalier because of what it was designed for, you cant refute that. I am not speaking other breeds here, Pit Bull Terriers have sparked this discussion and they are by far one of the most powerful and lethal dogs in existance when they attack.

Yes as Ailsa says for the same reasons lack of funds normally. The whole point being each and every dog in the uk would need to be chipped in order for the scheme to be workable.

I agree, it would be pointless only having some dogs chipped.

As for people not being able to afford a microchip, surely if they can spend hundred`s of pounds on a dog, they should therefore make sure they can afford a microchip if the dog isnt already chipped.
Or if that didnt work, make it the breeders responsibility to chip all pups and register them in the owners name.

The Biffters cost me fifteen quid. he's quality my dog is obviously!!!
Actually, his chip cost more than he did...in all honesty, his food bowl isn't far off.
Not everyone pays hundreds of pounds for their dog, infact, some people are given dogs....
I actually believe it should be the breeders responsibility to chip all pups born though and they should also pay. I know that's probably controversial but I believe it would stop some back street breeding, especially if the chip meant the pup had papers and the laws said every dog needs and must have up to date papers... :smt002

Fair point there Ramble ;-)

I think its more logical for breeders to chip the pups, that way the whole litter is done all at once and you need not worry about chipping, its just a case of the breeder then registering the pup with your details
I know this means more for the breeders but we need to start somewhere