Tough New Bill To Replace ‘Failed’ Dangerous Dogs Act
Published on July 5, 2010 by Jennifer White · 15 CommentsAnimal welfare organisations, veterinary professionals and local authorities today joined forces to condemn the much-criticised Dangerous Dogs Act, demanding that it must be replaced by a hard-hitting new Dog Control Bill focusing on prevention rather than cure.
Existing legislation has failed to reduce the number of dog bite incidents in the UK, which have risen in the past five years by 79% in London and 43% nationally*. Meanwhile costs have continued to rise; it was revealed that 10 million pounds has been spent by the Metropolitan Police alone in the past 3 years simply to implement Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act, relating to the seizure, kennelling and euthanasia of banned breeds.
The Dangerous Dogs Act Study Group (DDASG) has lobbied against the inadequacies of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 for many years and members of the group are now backing a new Dog Control Bill proposed by Lib Dem Peer Lord Redesdale, which will receive its second reading in the House of Lords on Friday (9th July). This Bill would consolidate previous legislation and better protect the public by targeting the cause of dog attacks – dog owners themselves.
Lord Redesdale commented: “People deserve to feel safe around dogs and this Bill goes a long way towards protecting the public through tougher action against irresponsible dog owners. The current law has done nothing but make banned breeds and their lookalikes more appealing and created the issue of status dogs because they are a status symbol.
“Owners of aggressive or violent dogs of any kind would be brought to account with this Bill, which in turn will prevent a large number of attacks by dealing with problem behaviour at the first signs of aggression rather than when an attack has taken place, as in current legislation”.
Can you spot the dangerous dog? The answer lies with the owner holding the lead.
If passed, the Bill will introduce major changes to current dangerous dog legislation, which is widely considered to be one of the most ineffective pieces of government legislation ever brought into force. These changes include:
- More emphasis on the owner’s responsibilities – the Bill supports the principle that it is the owner who has the potential to make a dog either well-behaved or badly-behaved. It gives authorised officers the powers to place Dog Control Notices on irresponsible owners at the first signs of dog aggression.
- Attacks which take place on private property would also become a criminal offence – a large number of dog attack incidents occur within the home and on private property. The Bill includes various exemptions such as being attacked by another animal, provocation, and attacks on individuals committing an offence for which they could be imprisoned.
- Legislation will no longer be breed specific – since the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, public money and resources have been wasted by already overstretched police authorities seizing dogs simply for being of a particular breed or type. Research now overwhelmingly supports the principle of ‘deed not breed’, and proves that genetics (breed) play only a limited part in the temperament of an individual dog, with environment and training having a far greater effect.
The DDASG has been working closely with Lord Redesdale in support of his Dog Control Bill and has long been calling on the government to repeal the current legislation. The Group believes that the breed specific nature of current legislation has caused it to fail, and that focusing on individual breeds has failed to prevent a large number of dog attacks, or reduce the number of Pit Bull Terriers in the UK.
DDASG Chairman Chris Laurence, Veterinary Director of Dogs Trust, said: “We firmly believe that the Dangerous Dogs Act needs to be overhauled to better protect the public and that a new dog control regime that emphasises responsible dog ownership should be introduced.
“The Dog Control Bill supports the principle that it is people, not the dogs themselves that make dogs dangerous. Lord Redesdale’s Bill would allow people to be better protected from dangerous dogs with tougher action taken against irresponsible dog owners.”
The Dangerous Dogs Act Study Group has also launched a petition supporting Lord Redesdale’s Dog Control Bill which already has almost 10,000 signatures. The petition can be found at http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/repeal-and-replace-the-dangerous-dogs-act.html
Highly Recommended: This could be the most important link you EVER click as far as your dog’s life is concerned – see why….!
Tags: Animal Charities, Animal Cruelty, Animal Welfare, Breed Specific Legislation, bsl, dangerous dog legislation, Dangerous Dogs, dangerous dogs act, Social Issues, the dangerous dogs act
[...] Tough New Bill To Replace ‘Failed’ Dangerous Dogs Act [...]
Ok I’m confused now, Ryan told me that the DCB didn’t get rid of BSL, but this article tells me other wise, or is this just another government trick, it would be brilliant if this bill did 101% get rid of BSL but I’m still not convinced that it will.
~John~
I’m confused……it says above that the dog control bill will not be breed specific. I’ve heard that this is not the case. Could someone clarify that the control bill will repeal section 1 of the DDA and not be breed specific at all??
Thanks
END BSL NOW!!!!!
hi, the dog control bill will competely repeal the dangerous dogs act 1991 and bsl alone with it.
you can read a copy of the bill here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldbills/004/11004.1-4.html
This new bill will also make it legal to import the now banned breeds. Are we ready to welcome them to the country? Do you want to take your dog for a walk when these now banned breeds are off the lead in your local park? Would you buy a house where the next door neighbour has a few Tosas in their garden? I think these breeds were chosen to banned for a reason, somebody must have done their research. They are banned in many other countries too.
I think there are more bites because people are more sensitive and report them more readily. Dangerous dog is also one that has scratched a person if that person wants to see it like that. But I’d rather be bitten by a little terrier than a Dogo anyday.
I think the safety of dogs around these dangerous dogs should be focused on too. The owner may get bitten while protecting their own dog from being bitten or even killed. That really doesn’t make walking your dog a pleasant experience, if you have to be on your guard in case some dangerous dogs are around in the park. I’d prefer to return home from a walk with my dog intact and not traumatized by a dog attack.
My dog is most often attacked by collies which are off lead, while mine is on the lead. Luckily though they are collies and not Filas or whole bunch of pitts whose owners have no control of them.
A scary sight when any big dog is held by a small woman launching at other dogs. You just count your lucky stars the person can somehow hold on to the lead or that it doesn’t break.
When I was a kid, I walked other people’s dogs for fun. Now I wouldn’t let my child to take our dog for a walk, in case irresponsible dog owners are about.
I think most male dogs should be neutered too. I think rescue boys should all be done, just like they want bitches to be. That would prevent a lot of bad dog publicity.
I don’t think anyone needs to own dangerous fighting breeds, too much responsibility, prefer to have a nice, relaxed life. Yes, there are so called dangerous fighting and guarding breeds already here and are fully legal. We are just waiting for them to express their breed instincts. Thankfully their numbers aren’t that big. People still like labs and spaniels more.
How about the person walking the dog, must weigh more than the dog.
I think this is a great idea, its taken people long enough to realise that its NOT the breed thats the problem. Id be glad to welcome all the banned breeds back into this country. Ive currently got a staffordshire bull terrier and a yorkshire terrier, the latter is the more work. Im sick of going down the street and having people tell me my dog is trouble and shouldn’t be allowed out. The government should educate people better on dogs seeing as its such a huge issue.
I think its about time that we stopped the horrible injustice to pitbulls and other banned breeds. Its like rounding up the jews for execution, many of these so called “monsters” have never done anything wrong and have been brought up to be wonderful, loving family pets who are perfectly socialised and good around other animals and people. It is sad to me that some uneducated people who call theirselves dog owners still blame the dogs and not the owners and support mass killings of thousands of innocent animals. Obviously they have not watched the dog whisperer cesar millan rehabilitate millions of unstable dogs (often so called safe breeds such as chihuaha’s, labs and spaniels) with the help of his beloved and amazingly well behaved pitbulls daddy and junior. It makes my blood boil that the finger is pointed at the dog when the person who made it that way is on the other end of the leash. A dog isn’t born vicious it has to be made that way. THAT INCLUDES FIGHTING BREEDS who have to be trained and made to fight. Any so called dog owner who thinks otherwise shouldn’t be owning a dog in the first place. Its time to end the dangerous dogs act that has claimed millions of innocent lives.
I am new to your website as i discovered it while ranting at my partner over a programme i watched in complete disgust this evening on the BBC animal rescue 24/7! I was in complete disbelief at the outcome of the RSPCA and the police entering a poperty where a dog and her puppies were being kept in the most appauling conditions the puppies were covered in urine and there was faeces everywhere, it was obvious from the condition of the bitch she had not been fed for what looked like days maybe weeks as she was so emaciated. As the police broke down the door and entered the property she was terrified and how did she react? NOT by attacking the strangers who could potentially harm her young but by wagging her tail in gratitude for being removed from such a terrible situation, later to be destroyed along with her puppies as they were pit bulls an illegal DANGEROUS breed – her behaviour was most certainly not in any way vicious or threatening and as for the vet im not surprised her identity was concealed she should be ashamed of her lack of compassion – as a professional person she should have used discretion! But its the law i hear the lunatics shout! I am fully aware of the terrible attacks on the public and its heartbreaking when theres a child on the news after being attacked by a dog – we have a right to protection but to be so naieve as to think that a dog no matter what the breed is “born that way” is as insane as the people who treat their animals in such a way that they become a danger to society! Personally i cant wait for the new bill to be passed if anyone is prepared to take responsibility for the current one which is a complete waste of time and poorly thought out if at all! Good Luck something has to change!
Criminal responsibility for a dogs actions whether in public or on private property is long overdue. Postmen will be able to have dog control notice
placed at their discretion and dogs will be destroyed even without biting.
I think this is good since the postman or people in the park will be able to force action if they feel intimidated rather than waiting for an attack to take place. Non compliance with the order leads to destruction of the dog. It is not good enough for the owner of a dog to say he’s fine he won’t attack, the owner is forced to take action based on others perception and complaints.
It’s funny that the people who say they are for ending cruelty to animals are the same people who sterlize and euthanize the animals.That’s like an abortion doctor saying that he cares about kids.People who neuter their pets are jerks.Would you do it to a person? Well maybe you would.They all claim overpopulation of pets but i hardly ever see loose dogs and cats in Northeast Tennessee. What causes a lot of these displaced pets? LANDLORDS!!!!! A family has to move,for whatever reason,they need an apartment,in the adds in the paper for apartments they all say “NO PETS”. Change the laws that a landlord cannot forbid pets nor children.But pets and kids make messes????? Let the tenants pay for damages or a pet fee for reasonable compensation for messed up property.Millions of pets die,are killed,every year because of landlords.Don’t forget that Humane societies commit mass murder of perfectly healthy pets.
Many “dangerous” dogs are just what they are supposed to be,guardians of their family.Must we all have toy poodles? I’m sure that social engineers would like to remove any form of self protection from families.If you are afraid of the german shepard,rottie,doberman or pitbull,don’t go on it’s property.If youre a postman just tell the people that they’ll have to pick up their mail at the post office.Before you applaud the destruction of ” tough” breeds,remember the movie TERMINATOR.Dogs really can sense bad intentions from people.The Kuvasz ( a big white hungarian guard dog breed )had bounties put on them by the Nazis because they were such good protectors.Personally, i would not put up with government agents seizing my dog, no matter the pretense.Dogs are a part,a piece of a family’s self defense structure.In my case my dogs alarm and/or attack would be followed by my shotgun,glock or ak.
Jim M, do you really need dogs and shotguns to protect yourself in this society, or are you protecting yourself from media induced fear ? I am quite willing not to go on the german shepard,rottie,doberman or pitbulls property but I believe they should not go on mine, which includes public places. Britain really is to small to handle such creatures. Public spaces are limited and these animals need regular exercise. I believe the priority is children and not animals.
Nina, you clearly have not done your research, you are unable to even spell “pit”. Sorry, that sounds more patronising than I wish it too, I am just making a point. Clearly your eyes are not open. These days pitbulls are amongst the primary breed owned in the inner city. They are absolutely everywhere trotting around at the foot of every chav and rude boy, as well as everybody else! It shows what a joke the DDA 1991 is, its completely futile. Its most certainly time to remove the ridiculous breed specific element and there is no need to fear the influx of banned breeds seeing as every other dog in London already IS one!
Fred,you live in Britian? You aren’t allowed to have guns in Britian are you? Your government disarmed you.You’re being dominated and repopulated by the peoples of North Africa, from the religion of piece ( as in,they’ll blow you to pieces ). You are currently be occupied by a people hostile to western civilization ( and christianity ). Oh i forgot,you europeans are giving up on Christianity. even though your ancestors fought long brutal wars,tooth and nail,to keep those same people from conquering you. I guess you just lost the will to fight for freedom.Actually the british were some of the most prolific breeders of fighting dogs.Most so called dangerous breeds, ( root stocks for the pitbull breeds ) originated in Britian. British fought more dogs than anybody.You also had one of the most repressive empires in history. Of course if you don’t care to defend your nation from assimilation into a global government you don’t need tough dogs or weapons.Your country lives under a defacto dictatorship of the European Union so you would not know about freedom.In America,most states,still allow a citizen the right to armed self defense whether by big nasty dogs or firearms.We will keep those rights.So when the people of the USA tell the globalists to go to hell,the American people will have the means to back up their words of protest with action.Harsh words and mini poodles do not deter dictators and their enforcers.I’ll depart with a question.Who has by force killed the most people in the world? Answer: Government troops and police. Now do you want them to be the only people with guns,K9 dogs? No one complains about vicious,intimidating police dogs,now do they?
Fred, You said the following…
“I think this is good since the postman or people in the park will be able to force action if they feel intimidated rather than waiting for an attack to take place. Non compliance with the order leads to destruction of the dog.”
So this seems good and fine… So did microchipping pets for “safety” reasons… Now they offer microchipping at the hospital to newborns for “safety” reasons… This is just the government tightening the grip around your neck.
So what happens when this law goes into affect for humans…
“Well, That Mr. Harbuckle is a odd fellow, he scares me a little”
“Yes, Your right, He always keeps to himself and never associates with anyone”
“Perhaps we should report him to the authorites, He seems like he could be capable of harming something with his current status”
It may sound far fetched, But so did the microchipping of humans 20 years ago.