[BBC News] Banned pitbull seized on island

[Scottish Terrier]

Sorry, since I didn't want to copy and paste the whole report, I only took the bit called "Conclusions"....you know, the bit which is usually the summary of findings and recommendations. i.e. the important bit!!!

 

And naturally "results" are not important then scottish terrier? We could go on like this forever so i think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this topic, surely we can agree on that at least!

 

I do agree that dogs do polarise opinion and you either tend to love or hate them.

 

I actually have no particular fondness for Pitbulls as a "breed" however I do have a hatred for the Dangerous Dogs Act.

If anyone cares to look at my earlier posts they will see that I am all in favour of protecting the public from dangerous dogs, I would just go about it a different way.

[Stavros]

I do agree that dogs do polarise opinion and you either tend to love or hate them.

 

Especially when they shit on your carpet. That's polarised my opinion of them a few times!

 

Stav.

[Chinahand]

I actually have no particular fondness for Pitbulls as a "breed" however I do have a hatred for the Dangerous Dogs Act.

If anyone cares to look at my earlier posts they will see that I am all in favour of protecting the public from dangerous dogs, I would just go about it a different way.

I have difficulty with that Scottish Terrier - you have consistently claimed that Pitbulls are not dangerous and if only every one was a responsible owner everything would be fine.

 

I would really like to see where you have come up with your claims that pitbulls are no more aggressive towards people than other breeds.

 

But even if this was the case and pitbulls only bit as often as poodles or whatever, the fact is that a pitbull bite will do massively more damage than a poodle.

 

It is the saveragery of the bite which makes the pitbull dangerous - plus a behavioural trait that it will attack without warning. Neither of these points have anything to do with responsible owners, and both of them make this type of dog dangerous - or should I be compromising - MORE dangerous than other breeds.

 

You may have a hatred about the Dangerous Dogs Act, but what should the authorities do when they discover a dog which their experts tell them is not good with other dogs or over 20% of people and which has a character trait which means it can attack without warning.

 

Especially where this dog's "owner" seems to be a pathological liar, who has continually changed her story, and where the dog has clearly been moved from one owner to the other for reasons which have not been properly explained.

 

Is this dog owned by a responsible owner with a clear place in the "pack" hierachy below every human?

 

Would you walk into the garden where this dog lives as a stranger - as the postman must do every day.

 

You seem to be at the forefront of efforts insisting that pitbulls are not a problem - and hence Champ should be allowed to go home, no problems at all?

 

I for one am very glad our authorities disagree with you - that this dog will be assessed and if found problematic put down or removed.

 

I for one think if his behaviour to either other dogs, or people is confirmed to be problematic he should be put down and not exported to be a problem elsewhere. Surely that should be the responsible way of dealing with this problem.

 

Hate the dangerous dogs act as much as you like. Practically I want to make sure children etc are not put at risk from dangerous dogs.

[WTF]

I really should pay more attention, I've never heard of fishkettle or Scottish Terrier.

 

Are they just here for the pitbull?

 

Stav.

 

looks like it. if only they knew what they were on about....

 

Sorry, I didn't realise I wasn't allowed in your private members club! I actually work for a living and generally don't have much time to mess about on my computer....you do know there is a whole big bright world out there!

 

I have no interest in the outcome of this particular Pitbull story however I do feel stongly about the Dangerous Dogs Act and its implications.

 

WTF - WTF have you said which is even remotely accurate or interesting

 

it was only said as a flippant jest and was not intended as a serious comment on your posts. but,

concentrating on the last line, what have i said that you feel is inacurate??

 

and as to your post before this one, i will say again ( you agreed before somewhere ) there is NO dangerous dogs act in the isle of man, if you hate the dangerous dogs act so much you should be ranting on UK websites where the act is valid. there is a 'dogs act' ( with no reference to breeds ) and a 'wildlife act' ( that makes pitbulls illegal to be here ) and the wildlife act is what has been applied to this case as that is where the dogs are listed.

 

it is not about how cute champ is, it is about the FACT he shouldn't be here, and CAN'T be here legally.

[fishkettle]

This woman who currently "owns" Champ is full of s**t. She has owned him for a few months, that is all. The previous owner had to get rid of him because, surprise surprise, he was being aggressive and violent towards his other dog (I know this for a FACT)! I saw this dog stalking around off the lead in Maughold with his previous owner and i was afraid to get out of my car with my nine year old son. Should people have to be afraid? No they bloody shouldn't. Moving him to Ireland is simply moving the problem onto someone else. How would all these self rightcheous Champ supporters feel if he attacked a child? He should be put down immediately, laws are there for a reason and one woman who's had a dog all of five minutes and therefore knows bug*er all about it's nature really should not be able to sway those who know better.

 

Ok, i need to add to what i said above earlier... The previous owner i mentioned above only had this dog for a day! This being the day it was in Maughold. He gave it back to it's owner (Dean) as it was being aggressive towards his dog and he was therefore unable to keep it. Dean was, as someone else mentioned, getting shot of it because of his living arrangements. Just wanted to clear that up in the interests of accuracy! As i recall, this was back in around April time (approx), so if sara does indeed own this dog, she clearly hasn't done for very long.

[loaf]

I'm suprised Sara hasn't been on here yet.

Unlike the Facebook group and (from what I can gather) the petition site too, she can't censor people who post opposing views on this site.

[Skeddan]

I actually have no particular fondness for Pitbulls as a "breed" however I do have a hatred for the Dangerous Dogs Act.

If anyone cares to look at my earlier posts they will see that I am all in favour of protecting the public from dangerous dogs, I would just go about it a different way.

...

You may have a hatred about the Dangerous Dogs Act, but what should the authorities do when they discover a dog which their experts tell them is not good with other dogs or over 20% of people and which has a character trait which means it can attack without warning

....

The UK Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 does not apply to IoM. The relevant legislation in IoM for dangerous dogs is The Dogs Act 1990 and the Wild Animals (Restriction on Importation, etc.) Act 1980 banning import of Pitbull Terriers and Japanese Tosas.

 

edit to add: this important point has already made by WTF but it seems to have been missed.

[DRIVER]

I actually have no particular fondness for Pitbulls as a "breed" however I do have a hatred for the Dangerous Dogs Act.

If anyone cares to look at my earlier posts they will see that I am all in favour of protecting the public from dangerous dogs, I would just go about it a different way.

...

You may have a hatred about the Dangerous Dogs Act, but what should the authorities do when they discover a dog which their experts tell them is not good with other dogs or over 20% of people and which has a character trait which means it can attack without warning

....

The UK Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 does not apply to IoM. The relevant legislation in IoM for dangerous dogs is The Dogs Act 1990 and the Wild Animals (Restriction on Importation, etc.) Act 1980 banning import of Pitbull Terriers and Japanese Tosas.

 

BBC 1 tonight at 7-30pm ,I think that program should show the types of people that own pitbull type dogs and the reasons why, lets lead the way and stop these killer dogs here and now.

[Bananaman]

I had a word with my local vet last night about the youtube videos of Champ. The first thing she said was - that's a pitbull TYPE dog if ever there was one. I then asked her how she would determine that Champ is a Pitbull. She said she would have to call in a genealogist to confirm this. Samples of DNA would be sent to the United States.

 

I then asked her if it was down to her, how would she classify this dog;

 

A PITBULL TYPE DOG

 

Now this expert that is coming over at great cost, are they;

 

1. A Genealist

 

2. MRCVS qualified

 

3. A (like my local vet) an LVI (look up their responsibilties ST chap)

 

4. They're coming from the UK, they're therefore not qualified to counter a DAFF vet's opinion on what covers the law on what is a dangerous dog. (you'll find the UK guidelines here http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/welfare/do...dogsleaflet.pdf . Which covers every thing concerning the banned breeds. You will also see that those rules concerning a dangerous dog are guidelines.

 

Now all you blinkered bloody dog loving types - now you really need to get your act together and sort out getting this bloody dog re-homed.

 

 

 

 

Do you really think that this expert will be willing to put their name to something that will be legally binding and then be held responsible for the consequences?

 

I think not.

[Skeddan]

I had a word with my local vet last night about the youtube videos of Champ. The first thing she said was - that's a pitbull TYPE dog if ever there was one. I then asked her how she would determine that Champ is a Pitbull. She said she would have to call in a genealogist to confirm this. Samples of DNA would be sent to the United States.

 

I then asked her if it was down to her, how would she classify this dog;

 

A PITBULL TYPE DOG

Sounds like she is uncertain whether or not Champ is actually a Pitbull Terrier, but clear that Champ is a Pitbull type dog (i.e. if not actually a pitbull, then sharing characteristics with pitbull terriers).

 

As I understand it, the Wild Animals Act 1980 only covers Pitbull Terriers, not Pitbull Types.

[WTF]

I actually have no particular fondness for Pitbulls as a "breed" however I do have a hatred for the Dangerous Dogs Act.

If anyone cares to look at my earlier posts they will see that I am all in favour of protecting the public from dangerous dogs, I would just go about it a different way.

...

You may have a hatred about the Dangerous Dogs Act, but what should the authorities do when they discover a dog which their experts tell them is not good with other dogs or over 20% of people and which has a character trait which means it can attack without warning

....

The UK Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 does not apply to IoM. The relevant legislation in IoM for dangerous dogs is The Dogs Act 1990 and the Wild Animals (Restriction on Importation, etc.) Act 1980 banning import of Pitbull Terriers and Japanese Tosas.

 

edit to add: this important point has already made by WTF but it seems to have been missed.

 

 

missed?? unlikely!! just ignored because it doesn't suit the irrelevent argument being put forward. still waiting for scottish terrier to back up this remark 'WTF have you said which is even remotely accurate or interesting ' now i realise the 'interesting' bit depends on your point of view ( if you don't want to believe something you are generally not interested in whats been said ) but what was not accurate?? if you're not interested ST, thats up to to you, just like you claim to be not interested in the outcome?? but please, point out my inaccuracies ( not spelling ones though )

[WTF]

I had a word with my local vet last night about the youtube videos of Champ. The first thing she said was - that's a pitbull TYPE dog if ever there was one. I then asked her how she would determine that Champ is a Pitbull. She said she would have to call in a genealogist to confirm this. Samples of DNA would be sent to the United States.

 

I then asked her if it was down to her, how would she classify this dog;

 

A PITBULL TYPE DOG

Sounds like she is uncertain whether or not Champ is actually a Pitbull Terrier, but clear that Champ is a Pitbull type dog (i.e. if not actually a pitbull, then sharing characteristics with pitbull terriers).

 

As I understand it, the Wild Animals Act 1980 only covers Pitbull Terriers, not Pitbull Types.

 

you understand wrong according to elsewhere in this thread , but after just looking at the paragraph in the wild life act where the dogs get a mention, it says 'other than the TYPE OF DOG commonly known as a pit bull terrier and the TYPE OF DOG commonly known as the japanese tosa' so it refers to 'types'?? whether putting type before the 'breed' makes any difference in law to putting it straight after the breed is upto legal bods to argue. i put the capitals in, in the act it is all lower case.,

[thesultanofsheight]

BBC 1 tonight at 7-30pm ,I think that program should show the types of people that own pitbull type dogs and the reasons why, lets lead the way and stop these killer dogs here and now.

 

Is it about fuckwitts and the type of fuckwitt that likes owning aggressive dogs? Because they are fuckwitts and like owning fuckwitts dogs because owning a fuckwitts dog makes them look hard to other fuckwitts. Only a total fuckwitt would like owning a fuckwitts dog and showing it off to another total fuckwitt would make them feel that they have reached the top of the fuckwitt tree.

[Cret]

But surely despite all of this fact finding it means little in terms of condemnation of/destruction of/muzzling of the canine in question if the owner is willing to ensure the dog wears sunglasses?

[comeover]

Now this expert that is coming over at great cost, are they;

 

Do you really think that this expert will be willing to put their name to something that will be legally binding and then be held responsible for the consequences?

 

I think not.

 

If the person concerned is coming from the UK then more than likely it is a gentleman called Dr Roger Mugford. He has done hundreds of these breed ID's for the police etc etc. And YES he will put his name to it.