RSPCA Welcomes MP’s Proposed Changes To Dog Legislation (K9 Magazine doesn’t!)
Published on July 1, 2009 by Ryan O'Meara · 3 CommentsDog owners could be made legally responsible for their pets being dangerously out of control in gardens and on private property, if a new parliamentary Bill is passed as law.
The RSPCA is supporting the Ten Minute Rule Bill1 proposed by Angela Smith MP (Sheffield Hillsborough), which also recommends dogs currently banned under section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act2 can be placed on the exempted register without being seized.
Editor’s Note: Don’t get excited people, we STILL have no legislation or in fact anyone (other than a few campaign groups who do nothing but!) demanding that section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act be ripped up and thrown away. So please read the rest of this article and recognise that K9 Magazine’s position on ALL proposed changes to UK dangerous dog legislation is simple and it’s this:
“Unless any proposals call for the unequivocal and immediate end to state sponsored legislation, seizures and killing of ANY dog based on breed type, we do not support it. No half measures, no appeasements, no compromises. We do not back, support or endorse any revised legislation until it tackles the abhorrent, disgusting and completely failed concept of breed specific legislation. So whilst others may ‘welcome’ changes, until the elephant in the room that is BSL is PROPERLY tackled, we don’t ‘welcome’ any rearrangement of the status quo.
We’ve had BSL for 18 years, it’s failed, it’s seen innocent dogs die, it’s seen pet owners lives completely ripped apart to a point that they will NEVER get over and we STILL have it. The only ammendment we’ll welcome or support is the complete and total repeal of legislation that focuses on specific breeds and specific breed types and it couldn’t be more simple than that. We promise never to speak out of the side of our mouth and to talk about improvements or positive steps forward on dangerous dogs legislation until the United Kingdom admits its mistake and removes BSL from the statute books. We recognise and fully support the good work the RSPCA do and hope they accept their error in supporting Lord Baker’s 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act – along with other major organisations who operate in the field of canine welfare – and strive to push for a complete overhaul of this dreadful law. Anything less is a betrayal of the dogs and families of those dogs who have been terminated by order of the state.
Thank you, (everyone at) K9 Magazine.”
——
Although the RSPCA remains opposed to breed specific legislation, this would ensure the better welfare of the dog and prevent the animal spending time in kennels while the exemption process takes place.
The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 currently only applies to public places and makes it difficult to hold an owner accountable if their dog injures, or even kills, a person or another animal in a private home or garden. The Dangerous Dogs (Amendment) Bill would change that by making dog owners legally responsible for their animals in public and private places.
Claire Robinson, the RSPCA’s Government Relations Manager, said: “By putting more legal emphasis on dog owners rather than their pets, The Dangerous Dogs (Amendment) Bill is a step in the right direction which we strongly welcome. In so many instances, the biggest problem of all is with the person at the other end of a dog’s lead, rather than the animal itself.
“However, the RSPCA remains opposed to breed specific legislation and believes it is time the Government took a closer look at the issue and replaced what is a flawed and outdated law.”
The Dangerous Dogs (Amendment) Bill will be read in the House of Commons today (Wednesday, 1 July). If the Bill is approved by the House of Commons at its first reading stage it will go on to receive a second reading.
The Communication Workers’ Union (CWU) and Royal Mail have already given their backing to the Bill. The CWU is campaigning on this issue after it was estimated that 5,000 postal workers require medical treatment for dog bites every year3.
The RSPCA has long stated its desire for the law to put more emphasis of responsibility on dog owners, rather than penalise specific breeds. Earlier this year the Society supported Lord Redesdale’s Dog Control Bill, which also took the emphasis away from specific breeds and made owners more accountable for their pets in public and private places. The Bill received cross-party support at its second reading in the House of Lords in May.
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, bsl, dog laws
UK politicians are just too useless to create new laws,normally also too busy
in parliament kissing each other’s backsides apart from when a vote is required
for their own benefits.
these poor dogs have the right to live! the american pit bull terrier can also be a very loyal intelligent social dog when in the right hands this same breed worked alongside the police force. was
the dog the in the film “little rasccles” which had a crew of children and was america’s pround symbol in world war 2. not untill media’s unfair and misidentification on this breed and breed spcific legislation this beatiful breed has beed inhumanly treated and thousands of pit bulls have lost there lives because of bsl. “PUNISH THE DEED NOT THE BREED” AND SAY NO TO BREED SPCIFIC LEGISLATION!. before it continues to effect more breeds like ot has in other countries.
I am a very big dog lover and always have been since i was a small child, my mother has had dogs all her life even since she was old enough to have her own.
To be honest i personally think all dangerous dogs and when i say dangerous i mean in the sense of dogs that are breed for fighting and hunting are more likely to attack people unprovoked than dogs of a softer nature, i have seen what pitbulls are like when out and about and they are very viscious dogs and that is the reson for breeding them for the sole purpose of frightening and scaring people for no reason what so ever and those types of dogs i am sorry to say were breed specially for these reasons ie fighting such as the pitbull, the staffordshire bull terrier, the Tossa, Rotties, all those dogs have the same kind of temprement and should not be owned by familys who have small children weather or not they have attacked or not this is not the issue the issue is we keep hearing about randam attacks without any provoking to the animal what so ever and this is the problem, those dogs don’t think in the same way as pet dogs do they are breed for fighting and fighting alone there is no way around that and anyone who thinks there is, well they are walking around with bloody big blinkers on and need to look at reality and see whats going on in the papers regarding children being attacked at every given chance because its in these dogs nature to do that its genic and that can never be changed ever.