The One Show Dangerous Dogs Debate
Published on November 10, 2008 by Ryan O'Meara · 11 CommentsEarlier this evening BBC’s ‘The One Show’ featured an item on dangerous dogs in the UK
The item was generally critical of the Dangerous Dogs Act.
However the programme’s main presenter Adrian Chiles made an ignorant remark about pit bulls which tended to suggest he hadn’t actually listened or observed what had been discussed in the item itself or indeed the very words of the show’s own correspondent just seconds earlier, namely that ‘all dogs are one species’.
I made the case in the programme for a change to the Dangerous Dogs Act and a move away from the concept of legislating against the breed.
The general gist of the piece is that there is pretty much only one person who still thinks the Dangerous Dogs Act in its current form is actually any good – unsurprisingly that is the man who brought it in in the first place, Ken Baker.
The piece suggested the idea of keeping all dogs on leads in public. This would actually lead to MORE dog attacks – the only difference being, they would occur in people’s homes rather than in public.
There is general support for the dog ownership suitability test on The One’s Show’s blog. Feel free to have a look and have your own say. Interestingly, the BBC will soon see from the many comments already posted, they can not, simply can not get away any more with promoting the notion of bull breeds being the ‘devil dogs’ as they are often portrayed. Views toward dogs are changing. The public now knows the DDA has failed. We can no longer pitch the idea that dog attacks are the exclusive domain of only certain ‘types’ of dogs.
Highly Recommended: This could be the most important link you EVER click as far as your dog’s life is concerned – see why….!
Tags: Breed Specific Legislation, Dangerous Dogs, DANGEROUS DOGS DEBATE
What did Mr Chiles actually say regarding the comment on ‘Pit Bulls’
It is always very upsetting to hear about any dog attack on a child, but simply proposing to keep all dogs on leads will not solve the problem in the UK today.
The Mayhew Animal Home in London works in collaboration with BARK (Brent Action for Responsible K9′s) to address some of the canine issues observed in today’s society.
‘Dangerous dogs’ in itself is a dangerous terminology as there are many different classifications under the dangerous dogs act, which people need to be aware of. To just classify dog breeds is not doing enough to remedy the more important issues of over-population and unregulated dog breeding and sales.
These factors are the catalysts behind the stories that appear in the media regarding dog attacks.
Working with Brent Council, the local police and other animal welfare organisations, The Mayhew’s Animal Welfare Officer’s (AWO)work in the community to address issues of irresponsible dog ownership, misuse of an animal and anti-social behaviour. Our AWO’s also work in school to provide educational talks, which works to remove the fear factor many children may have after not being exposed to dogs, or animals in general.
The Mayhew’s AWO’s will discuss how to read the behavioural signs of dogs, how to react to their actions and how to treat animals in general. with older students, they will explain the pertinent issues of today’s society, including dog-fighting, the importance of neutering and debunking the myths surrounding breeds such as the Staffordshire Bull Terrier.
More local Councils and government bodies need to address these issues on a community level and follow the lead of initiatives like BARK.
he said something along the lines off, “we should ask potential dog owners what sort of dog they want, and if they say pit bull, we should say no, its a sign of insanity wanting one”
Lisa
Mayhew does amazing work and is to be congratulated for it’s initiatives and programmes. However when caring committed organisations such as Mayhew get involved with areas that are really the remit of local councils, the promotion of responsible dog ownership and community safety, the national government ignores the funding resources required by local councils.
Without the Mayhew and others, the situation on the streets would be even worse than it is at present, but DEFRA and the Home Office needs to sort out adequate funding so that councils are able to offer educational initiatives and that working with animal organisations is a fairer partnership approach than is currently the case.
Lisa, please do not think I am knocking Mayhew, I am not, it is infuriating when the government of whatever political persuasion leaves taking the lead to others and then wastes money on projects that are for want of a better word ‘barmy’ when they should be diverting more funds to the education of irresponsible dog owners for the benefit of dogs and community safety.
Why doesn’t the dangerous dog act include that all dogs irrespective of breed should be muzzled when in a public place if they are not then fines and warnings can be issued and eventually if necessary remove the dog from its owner. This avoids any confusion by the police or local authority about the breed of dog and whether it is listed as dangerous or not as it is no threat to anyone whilst muzzled.
Robert
Why should ALL dogs be muzzled when the problems are caused by a minoirty of irresponsible dog owners?
Why not introduce a mandatory dog ownership test as called for by the Coalition For Improved Dog Ownership Standards (C-fidos) to promote responsible dog ownership in the community?
@Arthur Clinton, It may only be a minority of dog owners that are irresponsible but how can you be sure who they are. A series of test may identify the obvious people but this will not identify all. We need to be sure that people especially children are not put at risk and a muzzle will ensure that at least whilst in public places people are safe. My son and i were walking past a supermarket and as we approached the entrance a small dog tied up out side just flew at my sons leg without any warning or provocation and tor a hole in his trouser leg narrowly missing his leg, this was not a dangerous breed and the owner had scured the dog. If it had happened to be a small child it may well have had a very nasty outcome. Dogs can still smell and enjoy a good walk with the right and correctly fitted muzzle so i see no reason why this should be a problem. Any responsible dog owner i feel would agree.
Robert
I understand what you write but surely saying that all dogs must be muzzled is the same as saying that to prevent drink drivers, all cars should be abolished, or all guns should be destroyed ( hang on, not a bad idea really that one!)
The fact that the dog had a go at your son shows that the dog owner was acting irresponsibly by leaving it tied up outside a store when they perhaps knew that it had guarding tendencies and maybe they should not have left it there?
You cannot outlaw people going to a shop with their dog and going inside to buy things and leaving the dog outside, but when you then read or hear that a dog has been stolen from outside a shop where it was left tied up, maybe that is something that could have been avoided?
why should all dogs be muzzled? that is a ridiculous concept. if you truely think about the number of dogs there are and the number of attacks that occur especialy fatal ones, i bet you would find that there are far more cases of animal abuse than there are attacks. people are the evil ones in all of this. i own 11 american bulldogs and one dogue de bordeaux. my dogs have never been people aggressive. they meet everyone with a waggy tail. it makes me so angry the way dogs are being villified and im sick of ignorance. i tell you what if we are going to muzzle all dogs, why dont we tie all teenagers hands behind thier backs when in public. or what about mothers? i have heard of more mothers killing thier kids recently than pitbulls. shall we kill all mums as well.
and as for adrian chiles ignorant comment as to the insanity of wanting a pitbull. i would love one. not so that i could look hard or put my kids at risk, but so i could make it as friendly as my others and show the uneducated what a truely faithfull companion they can be in the right hands. the dda is out and out animal abuse and should be stopped. but its no surprise to me that its still in effect ,when in this day and age ,every six seconds an animal dies in unimaginable agony, in a british laboratory even though its been proven time and again that animal experimentation is missleading and that 1 in 6 people are in hospital due to the side effects of prescription drugs. my god if dogs killed every six seconds they would be outlawed.
the reality is that the type of people who own any type of macho fighting dog breed of whatever type, are from a psychological point of view emotional disturbed and intellectualy subnormal. They are generaly people of limited inteligence and could be catergorised as the type of intelectualy chalenged people who’s idea of entertainment is something as cretinuous as Grand Theft Auto. They should not in any way be confused with genuine dog lovers, who tend to be polite, civilised and rather pleasent people.
possibly an answer to the problem of dog ownership would be a mandatory IQ test or more sensibly ban all of these type of dogs completely.