Would you be willing to pay for a licence? Discussions

If I have an accident in my car my car will be repaired or I will receive the value of my car back due to paying my car insurance. Whether you feel the TV license fee is a con or not I`ve enjoyed watching Rome over the last few weeks.
I believe if a dog license was brought in as part of pet insurance more people would be likely to partake of it than if it was just a license to be allowed to own a dog. If brought in in this format more people would see a benefit in this than if it was just a license (an unofficial government tax), therefore they`d be more likely to partake.
Would a license stop animal cruelty or create better more caring, resposible owners, I don`t think so, do you ?
The license/insurance would benefit people & animals alike, I fail to see the benefit a license that gives no benefit to animal or owner would give, hence more of a reason why more people wouldn`t take part of it.
The license/insurance could be run through existing companies with a minimal extra cost to the owner who already pays for insurance (hence no more new governments departments to be payed for). Surely this is better than paying out what one could only assume would be an extra large payout for the customer i.e. you & me.
Personally I would rather spend my hard earned cash on me, my family & my dogs rather than a license that would change nothing to the benefit of dogs.
I see yet again Colin you have probably skimmed over what I`ve written in my previous threads on here because you have failed to ask any questions that I believe would have me umming & aarrhing about whether I should change my views.
Licensing is shutting the gate after the horse has bolted, didn`t work before & wont work now. I`m already a responsible dog owner & having a license wont change that just as it wont change an irresponsible owner into a responsible owner. Licensing wont improve the the amount of dogs in welfare centres.
I also don`t believe that local goverment would be interested in educating kids about dogs, I doubt it even registers with them till they need to be seen to be doing something for a few weeks. This usually occurs after some tragedy involving a dog & child. It`s up to me to educate my children in how to behave with dogs (no matter how infuriating & tedious it can get), not some local government officer doing it once in school assembly.

No I didn't skim over your last answer, I just thought some of it was ill founded and badly thought out.

The reason you couldn't just add it onto any form of dog insurance is because a lot of dog owners don't have or can't afford dog insurance hence why this country has to have such places as the PDSA and The Blue Cross and such like.

Your correct licences won't over night change an irresponsible owner into a responsible owner over night, but it comes under the same mind set as all those that didn't agree when the seat belt law was brought in , but over the years 99% of people now wear a seatbelt. Those that still break the law get fined, as you can't be sent to prison for not wearing a seat belt and you end up with a criminal record. Not good!

How can you say that if part of the licence went towards a national rescue centre it would not benefit dogs. Of course it would.

Your car insurance increases has very little to do with the government, but has everything to do with the amount of money it has to pay out because of accidents and car thieves. Blame the share holders who want a maximum return. Plus a car is not a life. All my dogs are irreplaceable.

Yes you and I along with the other people on this forum might well be responsible dog owners and having a license wont change that, but educating those that are not is what's its all about.

Look at it this way, if for every £10.00 a year I had to spend on each of my dogs for a licence I knew that it was going towards the health and safety of dogs even in a rescue centre or living with someone that needed extra help by educating that owner correctly by a dog warden than I would gladly pay £50.00 a year per licence.

The reason the children only possibly get to see someone once a year in a school assembly at the moment is because there is not enough staff. Have you ever tried to reach a dog warden over the weekend? You can't get anyone because there are no staff working.

Your opinion is based on what's a licence is going to do for you and your dogs rather then what's a licence going to do for dogs in general and in the end the long term greater good. Nothing changes over night, but things have got to change with education to all future dog owners!

Those intent on causing harm to a dog come into the same category as those that drive without a driving licence and insurance. They are the ones that need to go to prison for a very long time, but those that just refuse to buy a licence should as I had said above get a on the spot fine. Sorry but there is no excuse for ignorance.

As I`ve said before fines don`t work(believe it or not lots of people don`t pay them), the prisons are so overcrowded they`re letting criminals out early. If people don`t pay/can`t pay the fine but are unlikely to be sent to prison what will the government do, confiscate their dogs ? Therefore the vicious circle starts all over again. The person may even be a responsible owner, but never mind hey, they should have coughed up. Hence my cynicism.

You are way to cynical.

The reason I mentioned the seatbelt law was it all comes down to if you break the law you get fined, and if it a dog tag licence was introduced and people did buy it then there should get fined. So unles they have got money to burn and enjoy giving it to the courts they abide by the law. As noboby in their right mind wants to receive a criminal record of any kind.

I never said that there was anything wrong with you looking at for your own dogs, because I also look out for mine. But I'm also looking at the bigger picture and the welfare of dogs in general.

Tag a dog license to this & I`d be happy as long as no money went to government but went to a dog welfare organisation & it didn`t cost more than an extra £10 (in my dreams). Hence why in post 60 I put the following: £2.00 out of each licence went towards a national dog rescue centre. £3.00 of it goes towards extra dog wardens and the remaining fiver covers the cost of the biometric tag. I never mentioned the goverment.

You have got to have faith that along the way someone will do some good.

You have forgotten to budget anything for the collection and adminstration (considerably more than the £10 for a start I would guestimate) and then the necessarily policing (not forgetting that a warden costs more than his annual salary, he has to have human resources over and above that).
By the time you have budgeted for concessions for pensioners and those on benefits and all the, inevitable, default payers and spread the burden over all the solvent, responsible owners the fee is more likely to be three figures than two. The chances of this providing any extra revenue for rescue or welfare is not only non existance, in my opinion, it seems likely to create greater need when people are either obliged to give up their dogs or choose to avoid such a burden.

if my dogs get licences, will they be able to sit in the drivers seat of my car. ? :? :?
nero's a clever sod, when i pull up to park, he yanks the handbrake on with his teeth.

Why would there need to be concession for pensioners and those on benefits? They don't get concessions when they buy the dog or its weekly food.

We are talking about a one off yearly payment of around £10.00, which equates to 19p a week.

Default payers will full under the court system.

Sorry but I find it really hard to believe to people would rather give up a life long companion than pay for a £10.00 dog licence.

Just so long as he is wearing a seatbelt.

Of course you would not need concessions if it was £10 but as I said, in my opinion, that is totally unrealistic.
Yes defaulters could be taken to court but if you introduce legislation that will bring a whole new set of cases funds have to be found to pay for it. Fines can be levied but often people cannot or will not pay them. Also many people could just opt to get rid of their dog.

Hewey spot on, thats what I`ve been saying. Totally agree with you 100 % with what you`ve said.
At the end of the day why do we need a license anyway, I already own my dogs so what would the courts do to me if I refused to cough up (hypothetical question) ? Would they take my dogs from me ? If I refused to pay up for a fine would they send me to prison ? Any which way the dog suffers so any punishment is counter productive.
Why should I have to pay for something that would as far as I can see be of little value to me, my dogs & dogs in general.

yes i would

i also think every dog should be chipped to trace it back to the owner, if the owner turned out not to have a lisence, the dog should be either rehomed withsomeone who already was allowed to own dogs (had a license) or sadly destroyed - harsh - but it woudl reduce the amount of dogs that sufffer because no-one wants them

i also think people should have a lisence who breed dogs, and have to be registered. if they dont and they get caught, they should be fined like 500-1000.

i also think people who are not lisenced to breed should be made compulsary to have their dogs neutered or spayed - stopping the amount of litters born each year

if a dog was acidentally caught before it was spayed - for any reason - the owner should be fined - if the paragraph above was put into affect then this woudlnt happen and wouldnt be a problem

if the person cannot afford to have the dog/bitch neutred then they should not be allowed to own a dog (sorry but tats they way i feel)

any fines collected of the above offences (if it was brought into effect) should be given to dog homes to pay for neutering/chipping of all dogs needing homes

i also think all the above shoudl be aplied ot every breed of dog in the country.

thats what i think anyhow.

Brilliant, but it should be 500-1000 because that is only the cost of 1 or 2 puppies depending on the breed.

It should be more like a £5,000 fine.

My bitch is not spayed & I have no intention of having this done for the forseeable future if at all(my choice & nothing to do with economics), my bitch isn`t allowed to stray in the streets she`s very obedient so comes immaediately when called even if other dogs are around. She still gets walked when in season (generaly down an ancient Roman road that is inaccessible to most people unless they use a car, does this make me an irresponsible owner because according to pair of you (Colin & Suze) I am (reading between the lines).
My dog has been done but more down to the fact I wanted him to lose a bit of the Bullie testosterone which he has, but having my bitch done will serve no purpose at present.
Does that make me irresponsible ? I believe not, but I`ve a feeling you`ll disagree.
I also don`t particularly want to breed from her.

Sorry but did miss something.

At no point in this thread have I mentioned about whether to spaying a bitch or not.

The whole point of this thread is should dogs be licensed or not.

If you wish me to get into the debate on whether bitches should be spayed, then the answer would be yes.

Ok you might well be a responsible owner who walks her down an ancient Roman road, but that still doesn't stop an
irresponsible owner who has no or very little control walking an entire dog down the same path, and before you know it they could be locked together.

The point I was agreeing with in Suze's post was that they are far to many people out there just breeding for monetary gain and not to better the breeds. Now please tell me what's the point of breeding a mongrel? But people still do!

Now if all breeders had to have licences and each pup was mirochipped then it could be traced back via it's records.

As carefully as you believe you are, it only takes an accident for your bitch to become pregnant and then what are you going to do?

There are far to many dogs in rescue centres around this country already, so why take the risk of possibly adding to the numbers?

Sorry but what would the license actually do, or prove? That the dog owner has some disposable income and that those who don't really don't care about getting a license? I can't see how it helps or what it changes. What am I missing?

Read this thread from the beginning and it will hopefully answer all your questions.

Colin it`s a fair point about to many dogs being in rescue centres, but you did agree with Suzie about fining people that would have puppies without a license up to £5000. In light of this you went off on a tangent away from the original post about dog licenses if you`d care to reread your own post`s you`d see this. In light of this if my bitch got pregnant I`d be in line for a £5000 fine, doesn`t sound very fair to me, also most breeders on here seem to think that their is very little profit in breeding so what would be the point. You after all did point out that £500 - £1000 is the cost of only 2 puppies.

Yes your perfectly correct I did agree with Suzie about fining people that have puppies without been licensed.

The reason for this is because if all those that wanted to breed dogs had to be licensed then some form of controls could be put into place to maintain the breed standards, but at the moment any Tom, Dick or Harry can just breed their bitches without any thought or medical knowledge. Then once these people have sold the pups they offer no after care, all they want is the money.

As you said in post 73 you have no intention of getting your bitch spayed at the moment and don`t particularly want to breed from her. So why not just have her spayed.

The reason I said that people who breed who are not licenced should get fined £5,000 is because they have got to realise that the fine would be greater then there total income. If you look at our two breeds. Dobe pups sell for between £450 -£600 and Staff sell for around £250-£300 each around my way, so the fine would be great than the complete litter would make.

I know this may sound harsh if an accident appens, but like I said if people had there bitches spayed, then these accidents would happens and then hopefully it would slowly reduce amount of dogs in rescue centers.