Comments on: The Dangerous Dogs Act: Costing Lives & a Whole Shed-Load of Cash!

By: Fluffy-Chan

Fluffy-Chan — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 20:40:34 +0000

I feel so sorry for the dogs that will be killed because of what breed they are. It's discrimination and you know it! Every dog can be considered dangerous. But the only person you can blame is the owner, not the dog. I've seen loads of dogs that could be considered dangerous, but in the right hands, they are your best friend.

By: neil

neil — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:21:54 +0000

ah, i met these 3 three dogs some time back, such a shame they met ther end like this, really makes no sense at all. run free

By: Dave the Dog

Dave the Dog — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:26:50 +0000

"both sides make on it apart from the dogs and their owners. "
Sorry John, that's just not the case. Prosecution, whether by Police or LA is just a drain on budgets, if you have a budget for this in the first place.

The main people who may make money out of it are the kennels. If it's a decent kennels then that will be minimal.

Or the defence and expert witnesses.
Most expert witnesses and some lawyers/barristers do it pro bono or for minimum costs.
The majority of cases in my area are s4b so there is no legal aid.

The vast majority of the costs quoted will be for kennelling and court time.

"When councils do prosecute under DDA legislation they seem to forget how much it costs"
Not a chance, costs are always one of the highest considerations whether rightly or wrongly.

By: John LIlburne

John LIlburne — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 08:27:12 +0000

Prosecution costs, expert witnesses, lawyers, kennel charges, both sides make on it apart from the dogs and their owners.

When councils do prosecute under DDA legislation they seem to forget how much it costs, then again there are councils who do not prosecute due to the costs, Catch 22 for councils?

By: Amber

Amber — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 00:29:39 +0000

Buckets of cash, what a drain it is.