comeover Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Let the lady have her devoted dog back and as a compromise say it has to wear a mussel in public at least she gets to keep the dog Interested to know just how long she's "owned" her devoted pet?? Certainly not the 5 years she states. PS You still haven't spelt it right - even after editing it!! MUZZLE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vix Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Above just shows how narrowminded you lot can be. Not everything about a dog goes on Breed, if you went back over the last few centuries you would probably find a lot of the dogs that are "brilliant family pets nowadays" have attacked someone or something , its down to how the pets are brought up and looked after ie the owners influence. Re the dog in question, the owner has stated that she used to be a dog walker with up to 6 dogs on one walk, guess what her aggressive dog went with her with not a single problem. God i meet dogs when i am walking my dog all the time what show there teeth, growl and basically try and get to either you or the dog. now should they be put down!!!!!!!!!!!! Let the lady have her devoted dog back and as a compromise say it has to wear a mussel in public at least she gets to keep the dog I agree with everything you have said... I think that putting the dog down is a really extreme... If someone high up in the government ie. a MHK had this breed of dog I'm sure a less extreme measure would be put in place... As I said before the ban should apply to people trying to licence new pets.. not established family pets. If you read the facebook group many people had stated that they are happy to have their young children ( in some case toddlers) around this animal... this suggests that if people are happy to have their children around the dog is must never have shown any violent or aggressive behavior. If they are so worried about this specific dog they should put specific regulations in place and if the are owners are seen to be in breach of the specified regulations then by all means confiscate the dog :- Such regulations as * the dog is not allowed around children * must wear a musle in public etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vix Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 The dog has been seen by a behavioral specialist who has said the dog is perfectly safe. I think the comments are above are pathetic... stereotyping people without knowing any backround is not fair. Think before you post! You Vix are an out and out cock! I thought this was a discussion about a dog being put down not an 'insults exchange'. Nice to see you have brought an educated debate to this inferior level, just shows that you have nothing constructive to say.. Well done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
immortalpuppet Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 The dog wouldnt have had to be put down if the owner acctually give a shit about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutley Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 If they are so worried about this specific dog they should put specific regulations in place They are worried about those types of dogs and there are specific regulations in place - they're banned. Couldn't be any clearer or simpler than that. Doesn't matter how many people are happy (or stupid) to have their kids round the animal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sausage Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Does anyone know if there are any children in the household where this dog is/was housed ? I ask because I believe its very unlikely that anyone over the age of say 16 is going to be mauled to death by one of these dogs. However a child could be. No matter how miniscule the risk might be and how lovely and friendly and placcid the dog might be, the stories show that the risk with these dogs is there. I would therefore suggest a ban on keeping these types of dogs in any household where there is a minor living. To be honest it should be common sense and any sensible parent would see that. If there is a child and a pitbull in the house, the pitbull goes, no ifs no buts. And dont say any dogs can be dangerous and it should therefore apply to other breeds. A small child is not going to get mauled to death by a yorkie are they !!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 For those who haven't seen one this is a Manx Dog Licence application: IOM Dog Licence Application Please read Note 6. So exactly what does the lady in question put down on the form? I have still not heard from her defenders why on earth she bought a pitbull when there are so many alternatives that are not classified internationally as 'dangerous dogs'. Until I do I think it is they who are: narrowminded. as they can't see beyond their noses that owning this breed is illegal and thoughtless. P.S. In case you don't want to look at the link because it undermines your rationale for keeping the dog here is the wording of Note 6: 6. Under the Schedule to the Wild Animals (Restriction on Importation,etc.) Act 1980, no person shall own the type of dogs known commonly as Pit Bull Terrier or Japanese Tosa (or Tosa). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 If they are so worried about this specific dog they should put specific regulations in place There are specific regulations in place. and if the are owners are seen to be in breach of the specified regulations The owners breached the specified regulations. then by all means confiscate the dog The dog is now confiscated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 And dont say any dogs can be dangerous and it should therefore apply to other breeds. A small child is not going to get mauled to death by a yorkie are they !!!! My brothers youngest son was attacked by a Yorkie trying to bite him when he was in his pram, staying at a house with a Yorkie. It was a 'jealously attack' according to the owner (from a very spoiled dog), but they kept a very close watch on the dog for the rest of the stay. All dogs are unpredictable to some degree IMO, and will even bite a 'behavioural specialist' if she was to stand on its tail, which can happen easily with kids and dogs in the house. The rules are clear on this fighting breed, it needs culling, as do the pond-life that bred it knowing damn well what the rules are. People who class dog lives as just as valuable as human lives need culling too IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 The rules are clear on this fighting breed, it needs culling, as do the pond-life that bred it knowing damn well what the rules are. People who class dog lives as just as valuable as human lives need culling too IMO. You've just put yourself on your own culling list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 The rules are clear on this fighting breed, it needs culling, as do the pond-life that bred it knowing damn well what the rules are. People who class dog lives as just as valuable as human lives need culling too IMO. You've just put yourself on your own culling list. How so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vix Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 If they are so worried about this specific dog they should put specific regulations in place There are specific regulations in place. and if the are owners are seen to be in breach of the specified regulations The owners breached the specified regulations. then by all means confiscate the dog The dog is now confiscated. How did they breach the regulations when this breed of dog has been banned very recently, hence this whole issue has been brought into the public domain!? The government has issued a licence for the past 5 years, the dog has been microchipped and registered with a vet etc.. so all previous regulations were met before the introduction of this new legislation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comeover Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Pardon me?? This legislation has been in force since 1991!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 How did they breach the regulations when this breed of dog has been banned very recently, hence this whole issue has been brought into the public domain!?The government has issued a licence for the past 5 years, the dog has been microchipped and registered with a vet etc.. so all previous regulations were met before the introduction of this new legislation! So when are you saying this breed was banned? DAFF say it was 1991. As a further clarification to the public, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry advise that as an additional safeguard, there is also a prohibition on the import of the type of dog commonly known as the Pit Bull Terrier and the type of dog commonly known as the Japanese Tosa (or Tosa) under the Wild Animals (Restriction on Importation, etc.) Act 1980. This came into force on 19 June 1991 and includes the importation of such animals into the Island from the United Kingdom. Anyone in possession of one of these dogs, imported after that date would be in breach of the Act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Reckon the lady in question should get a cat - mind you she'd probably want a an American Cougar.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.