Are amstaffs illegal? Questions

Well from what i understand, if the dog is pit bull type, which most experts would say they are, it would be destroyed.

I recently dealt with a bill that was an imported am staff from the usa, off duty police officer reported it and the case went through the courts, the experts classed is as type and the dog was destroyed.
It only has to be classed as type, and from the pictures i saw it was very similiar to a pit in structure.
Even with the evidence provided to show the dog was an import, passport docs, quarrantine evidence etc, the dog was still destroyed before the appeal stage.

So please don't be under any conclustions that your dog would be safe because even with evidence it doesn't always mean the dog wont be destroyed.

one has to ask why one would even want to import any dog that would fall under DDA 'type' laws and therefore risk its life?

What really worries me is that although the information is there for all to see and understand there are those who would encourages and mislead people into thinking it is permissible to own or import animals listed in the act as prohibited.

Exactly. On that Bring In The Dogs TV programme they took away a dog from a young man in the tube station because it looked like a Pitbull type.

Undoubtedly in the end it is the dog(s) that suffer, on the other hand there are a load of oiks that are parading around with dogs that are, and are hoped to be, of type.

These people neither know or care about the dog, it’s training or welfare they are only interested in the street cred of owning such a dog and the more aggressive the dog appears the better it does it’s job, that of scaring or being a deterrent.

Most of them have no idea how to behave in the company of people so resort the dogs or knives, it is after all so much easier than learning to behave with consideration to others.

pita i hope you didnt aim that at me and think i would mislead and encourage someone to import a pit coz that wasnt wot i was sayin and if it was people shouldnt listen fully to what people say on sites as info cant be accurate as they decide what to do at the time and should get correct info from the goverment at the time they need it

thats exactly what everyone has been pointing out to you on this thread.
that being the government says that pit bull and pit bull types are illegal in this country.
you cannot own, sell, buy, give away, breed, nor import them.
you cannot apply for an exemption.
they are completely illegal.
therefore to say otherwise is misinforming someone on the internet and is contrary to the advice of the Gov, whom created the DDA Law.

yeah i no they were sayin that but thats what i knew i wasnt sayin get one its fine i didnt mean for it to come out like that what i was tryin to explain was the exemption so some people would understand that was why some pitbulls hadnt been put down or taken away

but there must be a loophole as i was at a kennel and they were rehomeing pit types and amstaffs. it wasnt up ntill recently that they started using the dda seriously if that makes sense as they were never alot of media of taking anything that luked pit type away

No offence intended. I find your post hard to follow as there is no punctuation. Maybe that is why people have trouble getting your meaning?
If some pits havent been put down or taken away its because they are lucky and havent been caught

No, they are just breaking the law.
The police and gov have been enforcing the DDA seriously since its creation in 1992. They just have phases of checking on people due to media sensationalism every time a child is killed by a dog (even though the dogs are often rotties, which arent banned by the DDA). When it quitens down, the police have other priorities, which is why some kennels get away with it.
N. London is rife with pit bull types. None of these are legal, nor have been bred because the owner applied for an exemption. They are bred by criminals.
Am staffs and Irish Staff are *sometimes* used as pseudonyms for pit bull. Some people attempt to skirt the law by using these phrases instead.
But they will still come under 'type'.

i live up in the north east and there is a few pit types and there has been nothing done so mabye that is were our differences are. we arent in a large city so the dogs are not the priority as they are not used by gangs to be agressive and dog fighting isnt a big issue up here

Christine if you live in the UK then it is illegal. To say or suggest otherwise is irresponsible and does the dogs and their owners no favours.

Pit Bulls, Am staffs and the like should not be owned by anyone even if the dog is well behaved and lives in the country, they are prohibited dogs and therefore likely to be ceased and destroyed. Why encourage anyone to put themselves and their dogs in that position

at what point did i say its fine. im not being irrisponsible as im not saying get one. irrisponsible is buying one and knowing, breeding and selling. so if someone did buy one its them being irrisponsible knowing the dogs fate. i dnt think if i sed buy one ppl would when theres alot to say dont.

By APBT owner Date 21.07.05 20:42 GMTBeing the owner of an American Pitbull, who we got from a rescue centre and were told was a cross staffie!! Until the vet told us otherwise! I would recommend you stay well clear of anybody who offers for sale any American Staff. As other members have said this is just a not so clever cloak for an American Pitbull terrier. They can be fantastic dogs as ours is but it has cost me £1800 in legal bills to keep our dog. For the record the Dangerous Dogs (Amendment) Act 1997 does allow you to own an American pitbull provided it is registered with your local police station (it will take them weeks to do this as noboby at ours new the law or could find the register!!) is microchipped and when in public on a lead and muzzled. For the long and very boring story of how I legally possess our dog please contact me or for legal advice with similar problems I will be happy to help. For the record we have our dog as nothing more than a pet!! Take my advice get a straightforward Staffie or similar they are effectively the same dogs! Good luck

i have added this as i found it on another site so you can tell me what u think of it. I DID NOT WRITE IT SO DONT HAVE A GO AT ME ABOUT IT!!!

Again that is incorrect information,
The index for exempted dogs is closed,you can't apply to have your dog placed on this unless proceedings are brought under the DDA,if you go to the police chances are your dog will be seized,and proceedngs will be brought against the owner,this can be very expensive as legal aid is not always available depending on which section of the DDA is brought.
The dog will be kept in a secret location in kennels until the case goes to court,it is then upto the court to decide if the dog poses a danger.

Why do you not try reading the act it's self rather than keep trying to push the owning of prohibited animals. I am replying to you on this forum and have no intention of replying to comments made on others. Two irresponsible people do not make matters any better. Read the act Christine and start giving good advice.

I live in the north east too and I can safely say that it is illegal to own a pitbull type here as it is in the rest of the country.

Just because nothing is being done about it in your area doesn't mean it is legal to own one.

It isn't. End of.

ETA Dog fighting isn't an issue up here? Get real.

This is a wind-up

Yeah I'm starting to smell something troll-like

Ok to cear things up,this is taken from EDDR,

THe DDA 1991.
The legislation was introduced in August 1991 following a spate of highly publicised dog attacks.

The Dangerous Dogs Act (DDA) 1991 is breed specific legislation (BSL) – Section One of the legislation refers to four types of dog:

the Pit Bull Terrier
the Japanese Tosa
the Dogo Argentino
the Fila Braziliero
It is illegal to keep any of the above types of dog, unless the dog is registered on the Index of Exempted Dogs and certain conditions of exemption are strictly adhered to. It is a criminal offence for a dog owner to be in possession or custody of any of the listed dogs, unless a certificate of exemption is in force.

When the law was originally introduced – dog owners had to fulfil certain requirements within a very short space of time in order to bring their dog within the law. There was a deadline given after which time the Index closed and those dogs not fully exempted became illegal.

There were originally 8,200 dogs notified to the Index of Exempted Dogs, by the end of 1992 a total of 4,821 dogs were on the register, this figure had dropped to 2,841 when the Act was amended in 1997 and 2,151 in 1999.

The Index of Exempted Dogs closed in 1991-it is not possible for a dog’s owner to take their own steps and register their dog, in order to bring it within the law.

The only way a dog can go on the Register is by Court order.

There is no provision for an owner to make an application to a Court themselves.

Identification.
With no known cases involving three of the prohibited breeds, the Act is in reality aimed at the ‘type of dog known as a pit bull terrier’.

The Act doesn't’t refer to the ‘American Pit Bull Terrier’ and uses the word ‘type’, a breed not recognised by the Government.

What wasn't’t initially explained was how the word ‘type’ should be interpreted. No governmental guidelines to ease the confusion led to frequent lengthy legal hearings debating the finer points of what was and what was not a dog of the ‘type’.

In 1993 the Queen’s Bench Divisional Court determined the legal definition of the word ‘type’. In the landmark case of Dunne and Brock Their Lordships, Justice Glidewell and Justice Cresswell stated:

“That a dog of the type known as a Pit Bull Terrier is an animal approximately amounting to, near to, having a substantial number of characteristics of the Pit Bull Terrier”.

The floodgates were open, any dog, regardless of its parentage, could be of the 'type', behaviour was relevant, but not conclusive. Countless pet dogs have suffered and lost their lives due to the draconian nature of the law, a law in the words of one senior Judge "designed to promote death".

The American Dog Breeders Association's (ADBA) breed standard was and still is used as the 'yardstick' for identification.

Burden Of Proof.
Under Section One the Act, the ‘burden of proof’ is reversed - this means that it is up to the dog’s owner to prove that their dog is not of the ‘type’, rather than the prosecution prove that it is.

It had been challenged in the case of Bates at the High Court and with the European Commission, but upheld. What this means for the ordinary pet owner, is that an accusation that a dog is a prohibited type of dog needs only to be made, it is then up to the dog’s owner to prove otherwise.

Making it even more difficult for pet dog owners in a court of law to prove their innocence when charged with a criminal offence

DDA Amendment 1997.
The law was altered in June 1997.

Campaigners and welfare groups had, for over five years, kept up the pressure and highlighted the injustices of the legislation.

The Dangerous Dogs Act Reform Group was set up by the Late Lord Houghton, an ardent opponent of the DDA, it was supported by the main canine welfare groups, EDDR was an active member, attending meetings at the House of Commons, before it disbanded in 2000. The Amendment was crafted by DDA expert Trevor Cooper, a solicitor who has vast experience of DDA cases.

Prior to the Amendment, any dog found guilty of being a pit bull type, received the death sentence-there was no other option than for the courts to order destruction, any dog found guilty of an aggravated offence under section three also received a mandatory death penalty.

The Amendment returned discretionary powers to the courts – which means that if a dog is now found guilty of being of the type, the court can order that the dog be registered onto the Index of Exempted Dogs, providing that the court is satisfied the dog does not constitute a danger to public safety.

The ‘burden of proof’ still remains reversed.

The number of prosecutions under this Act had drastically reduced over the years following the Amendment but have increased in some areas, notably Merseyside, following the tragic death of a child in Merseyside, January 2007.


Powers of Seizure:
The Police have the power to seize a dog which they feel is a prohibited type, the dog doesn't’t need to have ‘done anything ’ just look the wrong shape and size.

If the dog is in a public place it can be seized without a warrant. A warrant is needed to seize a dog from private premises – your home.

One a dog is seized – it will not be destroyed as an illegal dog – unless you, the owner, give your consent or a court of law orders it destroyed.

The important thing to remember, for any dog owner who finds themselves in this position, is that you do not have to sign over ownership of your dog – if ownership is relinquished the dog may be destroyed.

You do not have to give permission for your dog to be destroyed – obtain legal advice immediately and contact us for advice.

A seized dog will be detained until it is examined by an expert used by the authorities, the results of that examination will determine whether the dog is returned without charge, or whether the case is submitted to the CPS.

Dogs will be detained in kennels, their location is usually not given to the owner and access is often denied, unless the dog is being see for the purposes of examination.

Registered Dogs:
Dogs registered either back in 1991, or since 1997 via court order have to comply with the following requirements (within a designated time) in order to obtain a certification of exemption:

* Neutering * Micro chipping * tattoo inside rear leg * insurance cover.

Compulsory muzzling and leash in public places:

Registered dogs have to be muzzled and held on a lead by someone over the age of 16yrs at all times when in a public place (which includes inside your vehicle when it is itself in a public place e.g., on the road).

A registered dog’s muzzle cannot be removed at any time when in a public place, if it is - a criminal offence will have been committed.

Owners cannot remove the muzzle to allow their dog to drink or eat if in a public place.

Even if a registered dog is being sick and chocking – there is no defence for removing its muzzle.

For this reason, owners of registered dogs have to take special care to safeguard their dogs welfare; especially where dogs may be ill, have a medical condition e.g., epilepsy, or in the case of older dogs and during hot weather.

Insurance cover:

The compulsory Insurance is renewable each year and must be kept up to date in order to comply with the law. It currently costs £42 pa and cover is provided by Pet Plan via the Index of Exempted Dogs.

Health cover is difficult, if not impossible to find, EDDR has contacted several insurance companies recently and none have provided health cover for registered dogs - if you know of an insurance company which does offer cover for registered dogs, please let us know.

Owners of registered dogs must also comply with the following regulations:

You shall not abandon your dog or allow it to stray - your dog must be kept in secure conditions at home so it cannot escape.
You are not allowed to sell or exchange your dog. You cannot give it to anyone nor advertise it for sale or as a gift.
The Index of Exempted Dogs must be notified if you move address or if your dog is kept at a different address for longer than 30 days.
The Exemption Certificate and Insurance Certificate should be kept safe in case you need to produce them. A Police Officer or Local Authority can ask to show your certificate or produce it within five days and immediately display the dogs tattoo and allow its chip to be read.
The Index of Exempted Dogs will need to be notified of the death or export of your dog.