Comments on: Dog Ownership Licence Proposed

By: Sara

Sara — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 16:55:08 +0000

Having a license to own a dog? Jesus, what’s next… You people need to stop being so emotional and go back to read some Orwell.

Don’t you think it is a BAD thing that we have to have every little part of our lives under scrutiny. No-one is perfect. It’s like living with a Jewish Mother hanging over your every move. Have you ever walked across the street without a crosswalk? You CRIMINAL!!

What you seem to be missing is the fact that there ARE bad dogs. Not bad BREEDS. They are created by bad BREEDERS. If you are going to license something and regulate something then it’s the breeders you need to look at. But if you expect the cops to go after every bad breeder you are nuts. The only thing you can really do is public education. Teach people how to choose a breeder and how to choose a dog.

How many times have you seen some dope go for a dog because it came up to them or because of how it looked as a pup. Duh… NOT the way to choose a pup. Or they don’t care as long as the price is right.

What we need to ban is STUPID PEOPLE.

On the other hand everything is getting so ridiculous. You can’t even become a breeder without spending a fortune on x-rays and genetic tests and expensive lines of dogs…in the end we will screw ourselves out of lots of great dogs and only the rich will be able to afford one.

I shouldn’t even have to license my dog! So long as I take care of my dog why does the city or county get to take my hard earned money? It’s not like we have a dog park or anything remotely dog friendly. More fees. We’ll be fee’d to death pretty soon!

So you want a goldfish? You have to get a fish license.

You want to buy a TV? Can’t unless you take a course on safe TV watching and pay a fee.

Want to ride a bike? Wear a helmet and pay a fee for a bike license.

Jesus! Cut it out already before I have to move into a cave in the woods just to be able to have some freedom!!

Land of the FREE?? Home of the Brave? HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

More like land of the FEE’s and home of the Yellow Bellied Sap Suckers who give up their cash and freedom for a little “safety”. If we were all safe we would have no fun at all! Just think about how fun life would be with mom saying did you wash first? Don’t eat that sushi it might give you worms! Don’t do this…don’t do that.

Screw this! You people want to put MORE chains on us all? I seriously want to puke.

By: Allen

Allen — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:55:42 +0000

I live in the US but the song is the same here. If we are to ban Bull Terriers because more than one has been involved in an attack, then we should ban the dumb rednecks that invariably own them instead. If my mother was mugged by a black man, I would be a racist to propose that all black men be restricted or outlawed in my town.
Owners are the problem and they should at least be educated or made aware of the care and training methods most useful with each breed. If I buy a motorcycle, an ATV, or even a skateboard, It comes with warning labels and I am expected to use proper safety equipment. I was required to prove my ID and be background checked before I bought a gun. I have to have a license to drive a car. A cup of coffee in America has a warning label on it for cryin’ out loud!
The problem is that any dumb cracker can go out and get a powerful and sensitive animal and treat it however he likes. The reason these powerful breeds get the bad reputation is this: They are dangerous animals if treated poorly or placed in the wrong situation. If I mistreat or poorly raise a Chihuahua and it bites someone, they need a band-aid. Then we laugh and say’”feisty one isn’t he?” If my Amstaff or my Great Dane bites you, you are going to the Emergency Room and I will be sued. Both situations are the fault of my poor parenting, but one causes more of a problem than the other.
I don’t think people should have to have a license to own a dog, but the information and training should be free and readily available to any owner, so there is no excuse to own an unbalanced animal.

By: Helen

Helen — Tue, 27 May 2008 11:05:31 +0000

I have proposed this to my MP, and received letters from the H.O.C. saying that it is not practical, difficult to enforce, too costly, and the best bit… After consultation with the Association of Chief Police Officers the current legislation just needs to be more rigorously enforced, but they intend to publish new guidance on issues surrounding dangerous and unruly dogs.

The bit that stood out most from the reply (which comes from DEFRA through the H.O.C.) was the fact they say it would be CONTROVERSIAL to change the legislation due to evidence of major world trade in banned pit bull type dogs!

The fact that RSPCA and many other dog groups, backed by bite stats prove the breeds shouldn’t be banned at all is overlooked!

The suggestions I made were arrived at after lengthy discussion with many owners, and used parts of legislation for the ownership of ‘dangerous dogs’ from other countries. The conditions for dogs able to cause serious injury obviously being a consideration, but not one we shouldn’t be able to overcome should we wish. All of the people discussing this agreed they would happily be subjected to it.

My final thought on the matter is that these people don’t care, any that do are obviously not high up enough to make a difference. Another lovely part of being British we will lose - the ability to choose our preferred breed of ‘man’s best friend’! Sad? I think so!

Attacks are rarely unprovoked, they stem either from bad training, lack of socialization or a person (including children, who are their parents responsibility) and their direct actions towards the dog! The solution is not to ban the dog, as to follow this trend would lead to complete erradication of all canines!

We don’t operate a ‘they’re all the same’ policy with people, as it’s considered racist - why do it with dogs?

By: Racheal

Racheal — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:35:12 +0000

This would be a good idea but how would it be enforced?

All I hear recently is of children being attacked, why cant we focus on the children that ARE NOT being attacked by pets?
WHY?? Because the stats are so much higher of non attacks then theyre is of attacks.

By: Marc Thomas

Marc Thomas — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 18:31:23 +0000

Fantastic idea a dog licence, with the owner liable for the dog this is what people should be thinking!!
To ban certain breeds of dog is worthless it will cause more problems
problem 1. The dog owner changes breed and makes that breed just as nasty but all is legal!
problem 2. Its a creation of jobs, the people who use the dogs for fighting and most other low life scum will now be able to sell these dogs at double the price you just made a new blackmarket item!

As we see on the last paorama with the media focusing on the fighting side to the animal, yes we will see a mean and highly strung dog but its down to human control.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A BAD DOG ITS A BAD OWNER.

Banning a particular type off breed is worthless it causes more problems and more of the tax payers money to control and ”try” and fix.

If this country could apply a license all expenses could and would be charged to the dog owner.

Tragic deaths that have occured may not have been occured if all humans had to be vetted makes sense people push for it!!

By: daniel cody

daniel cody — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 11:58:44 +0000

i think a licence would be a great idea to stop just anyone getting a dog. i have always owned bull breeds of some sort without incident but i see far too many people that can’t control their collies or other dogs which means that my dogs have been bitten many times by other dogs because some people just don’t train or scocilaise their pups.