[BBC News] Banned pitbull seized on island

[Cret]

This whole thing gets more & more like something you might expect to hear about on telly, hosted by Jerry Springer or Ricki Lake.

 

So everyone who buys one of those balloons is broadcasting they support illegal activity. Cunning.

[Mutley]

Will they print any message on a balloon for you?

[hboy]

Will they print any message on a balloon for you?

 

Maybe they are hoping to save him from death row by tying enough balloons to him so he can take off and land in Ireland where he'll be safe.

[DRIVER]

I think they must both be on the laughing gas

[Celt]

I do wish people in authority would listen to the experts, i.e. the MSPCA staff who have said there is nothing wrong with the dog.

 

I'm wondering what, if any, Qualifications these Mspca " Behavior Experts " have?

 

Look at the late Barbara Woodhouse. So call " Expert " who was that bonkers she came across looking like she'd spent her childhood sucking lead soldiers

[Static]

I do wish people in authority would listen to the experts, i.e. the MSPCA staff who have said there is nothing wrong with the dog.

 

I'm wondering what, if any, Qualifications these Mspca " Behavior Experts " have?

 

Look at the late Barbara Woodhouse. So call " Expert " who was that bonkers she came across looking like she'd spent her childhood sucking lead soldiers

 

With the greatest of respects to MSPCA staff the vast majority of them are volunteers who love animals. Not behaviour experts.

 

And ROFL to Barbara Woodhouse!

[loaf]

I have been puzzled all along as to why:

• the owner wants a pitbull terrier rather than a less ferocious breed?
  
• she does not seem to have done anything to get the dog rehomed?
  
• she has waited until the second lot of two weeks extensions is running out to make a fuss?
  

One could speculate that the authorities on the island may have unofficially turned a blind eye to the dog being here for three years or so, but perhaps a neighbourly dispute or an official complaint has been lodged against the animal (perhaps out of spite) and so the official legal line has to be taken. It would explain why the owner has been in denial of the worst happening, perhaps because thus far, the authorities have been so lenient and nudge-nudge, wink-wink. That would explain the 'but he's been here for three/five years, but he's got a licence, but he's got a microchip..'.

 

I think I should add two more to the list at this stage:

• Why have none of the people off the Island who are expressing support for her and such love for the dog volunteered to rehome it?
  
• Is she hoping to get paid by the media for her story?
  

 

The latter point doesn't interest me to be honest, but the former does. The accusation 'you're clearly not an animal lover' has been used a number of times against people who do not agree that the dog should stay. So, where are the animal lovers, falling over themselves to give Champ a home?

[Skeddan]

So, where are the animal lovers, falling over themselves to give Champ a home?

It looks like one of the reasons is that Champ is not an 'animal lover' - the 'behavioural specialist' says he is not good around other dogs. (So is a dangerous dog).

 

If not good around other dogs, I wouldn't have much confidence in it being around a new-born baby. Suppose Champ did maul and maim or kill the owner's baby; I guess then it would be the govmints fault for allowing her to keep the dog.

 

In the UK, hundreds of non-dangerous dogs are destroyed because no home can be found for them. Why the fuss over destroying a dangerous dog when no home can be found? The authorities have even given extra time for this. What exactly is the objective of the 'Save Champ' campaign? Should Champ and other unwanted dogs (dangerous or not) be kept indefinitely at taxpayers expense?

 

I can think of more worthwhile causes than a campaign for state housing and support for unwanted dangerous dogs.

[Cret]

You forgot to mention illegal as well as dangerous.

[manshimajin]

Maybe they are hoping to save him from death row by tying enough balloons to him so he can take off and land in Ireland where he'll be safe. :

Visions of that Brazilian priest who had all those balloons tied to him and disappeared in the Atlantic.

I do wish people in authority would listen to the experts, i.e. the MSPCA staff who have said there is nothing wrong with the dog.

I do hope people in authority will listen to the experts in the Australian RSPCA who say pitbull terriers are not a species that people should be allowed to keep at home....but then of course I had forgotten, because they don't agree with you they cannot be as expert as the MSPCA - indeed probably just a bunch of dog hating Ozzie amateurs with no experience of animals.

[Lonan3]

Don't mention Australia! Once champ is gone they'll be wanting a bloody dingo!

[mouse30]

Dogs and other domestic pets by their very nature and unpredictable regardless of their breed.

 

I don't think that Champ should be put to sleep because he hasn't attacked or injured anyone and I'm sure that the owner would be sensible enough not to let him be around a child or other dog unless he was supervised.

 

A better idea would be to ask the owner to sign a legally binding document to state that the dog must wear a muzzle whenever it is in a public place, and failure to do so would result in the dog being put down- even though this would be harsh at least the dog would be spared his life and as is owners are desperate for their much loved pet to be returned I'm sure they would be only too happy to comply wih this

 

I do not own a dog - I have cats and as soft and loving as they are, I still would not trust them to be left alone with a young child unless I was in that room and could keep check.

 

Most of the attacks that have been carried out by so called "dangerous breeds" could have easily been avoided if the owners would take more responsibility for their pets

[P.K.]

Jeeeze... 267 posts of complete and utter shite. Who says there's nothing to do on the island eh?

 

ALL dogs bite, that's why they have teeth, funny that... Some breeds can inflict very serious wounds. Pit Bulls come into this category. That's why they are banned. I was going to post "persona non grata" but that falls into the trap where really stupid dog owners think that everyone else views their "pet" in the same way they do i.e. "there's no need to be afraid, he/she doesn't bite" etc etc and also giving the dumb animal human characteristics when it's a fucking dog for Christ's sake! Laughably stupid. Unless, of course, you are a heavily tattooed wanker who is so thick that you think that having a "heavy" dog adds a few more inches onto your under-used plonker. Have you checked recently? Because it hasn't....

 

A man takes his Rottweiler to the vet. "My dog's cross-eyed, is there anything you can do for him?"

"Well," says the vet, "let's have a look at him". So he picks the dog up and examines his eyes, then checks his teeth etc etc. Finally, he says "I'm going to have to put him down."

"What? Because he's cross-eyed?"

"No, because he's really heavy."

[Gladys]

Rubbish.

 

It shouldn't be here and should be removed. We should not be trying to bend the rules to apply in this case, why should we? It cannot be re-homed on the island; it is illegally here. Full stop, nothing more to be said.

 

Frankly, I wouldn't trust someone who has, so far, acted kind of questionably to muzzle the creature. Besides that, as has been noted above, the majority of attacks happen on home turf where the dog is confident of its position in the pack.

[Cret]

But it doesn't matter that he's illegal and dangerous because he's furry, and hasn't eaten anyone yet.

 

And, and, oh just be quiet, you don't "know" the dog so you can't say anything about him. Yeah but no but, etc.