Is it time for dog owners to have official training? (From Southend Standard)

it's time for the by-laws regarding dogs to be applied more vigourously, there's a need for the reintroduction of a dog licence, there's a need to regulate the breeding of dogs.

“I also think all dogs should be microchipped. It all sounds a bit nanny state, but it’s ths sort of thing that might prevent kiddies being bitten.”

How? Do they have some sort of special microchip in the military, implanted into the dog's brain, that can stop it in its tracks before it attacks someone?

Does anyone really believe that the sort of owners who would have a vicious dog would volunteer for an owner's handling course? Yet another suggestion to penalise the majority for the actions of a minority. Clearly action is required to eliminate vicious dog attacks but I do not believe this is the answer.

Ian P wrote:
Does anyone really believe that the sort of owners who would have a vicious dog would volunteer for an owner's handling course? Yet another suggestion to penalise the majority for the actions of a minority. Clearly action is required to eliminate vicious dog attacks but I do not believe this is the answer.

Spot on!

Yet again we see a call for more regulation, more legislation, more expense for all, when what is needed is proper enforcement of the existing legislation and a will to do so.

Not Mr Dukeson's ludicrous nanny state 'For the chilldreeeeen!' suggestions.

Only good dog owners will microchip and licence their dogs. The rest just won't bother, surely this is obvious. Muzzling the only answer. What's wrong with everyone.

Yet again minority brake the law and the majority have to pay for it. Its time the government started dealing with the minority and leave the law abiding majority alone.

Quote: "There are also issues with the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 as it means police often do not record dog attacks on other dogs as a crime.
It requires a dog to be “dangerously out of control”, making a human fear for their safety, to be classed as an offence."
-
So, if an owner is taking his/her dog for a walk and it is attacked by another dog (especially a large dog like a rottweiler) it is totally reasonable for this dogwalker to be in "fear for their safety". Therefore, the recent attack by a rottweiler killing a dog out for a walk is a criminal offence, not a civil matter as indicated by police. So, Essex Police, do your job.
-
Quote: "The only other option for the police is to arrest the dog owner for criminal damage but they must prove they either intended the attack to happen or were reckless."
-
If it is off the lead where it should be on a lead, as per Southend Council dog control orders, and it attacks a dog or person, this can surely be classified as reckless. So Essex Police, do your job.
Seems there is no excuse not to enforce the law in the many cases we have recently read about. Essex Police and Southend Council, do your jobs.

emcee wrote:
Quote: "There are also issues with the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 as it means police often do not record dog attacks on other dogs as a crime. It requires a dog to be “dangerously out of control”, making a human fear for their safety, to be classed as an offence." - So, if an owner is taking his/her dog for a walk and it is attacked by another dog (especially a large dog like a rottweiler) it is totally reasonable for this dogwalker to be in "fear for their safety". Therefore, the recent attack by a rottweiler killing a dog out for a walk is a criminal offence, not a civil matter as indicated by police. So, Essex Police, do your job. - Quote: "The only other option for the police is to arrest the dog owner for criminal damage but they must prove they either intended the attack to happen or were reckless." - If it is off the lead where it should be on a lead, as per Southend Council dog control orders, and it attacks a dog or person, this can surely be classified as reckless. So Essex Police, do your job. Seems there is no excuse not to enforce the law in the many cases we have recently read about. Essex Police and Southend Council, do your jobs.

Well, are you surprised that Essex Police are claiming it is a civil matter in order to avoid dealing with this, whilst SBC's employee responsible for these "civil matters" does their best to claim it's not? This abdicating of responsibility seems all too prevailent these days.
Whilst I support Mr Dukeson's suggestion that dog owners should have training to ensure they can control & look after their pets, I can't help but wonder if he would suggest this, were he not "a professional dog trainer in Southend".

Bosniavet wrote:

emcee wrote: Quote: "There are also issues with the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 as it means police often do not record dog attacks on other dogs as a crime. It requires a dog to be “dangerously out of control”, making a human fear for their safety, to be classed as an offence." - So, if an owner is taking his/her dog for a walk and it is attacked by another dog (especially a large dog like a rottweiler) it is totally reasonable for this dogwalker to be in "fear for their safety". Therefore, the recent attack by a rottweiler killing a dog out for a walk is a criminal offence, not a civil matter as indicated by police. So, Essex Police, do your job. - Quote: "The only other option for the police is to arrest the dog owner for criminal damage but they must prove they either intended the attack to happen or were reckless." - If it is off the lead where it should be on a lead, as per Southend Council dog control orders, and it attacks a dog or person, this can surely be classified as reckless. So Essex Police, do your job. Seems there is no excuse not to enforce the law in the many cases we have recently read about. Essex Police and Southend Council, do your jobs.

Well, are you surprised that Essex Police are claiming it is a civil matter in order to avoid dealing with this, whilst SBC's employee responsible for these "civil matters" does their best to claim it's not? This abdicating of responsibility seems all too prevailent these days. Whilst I support Mr Dukeson's suggestion that dog owners should have training to ensure they can control & look after their pets, I can't help but wonder if he would suggest this, were he not "a professional dog trainer in Southend".

Spot on.

Many of the dog breeds that are seen as "trophy" dogs are owned by a certain type of people who tend to inhabit social or rented housing.
~
I suspect that the vast majority of these have a lifestyle funded by housing benefit.
~
Councils/housing associations should ban all tenants from owning dogs in these houses. Private landlords often do so why cant the Council.

That guy looks like his dog!!!