Demands grow for 'weapon dogs' to be brought to heel

[Hotchilidog]

"The number of dangerous dogs used by criminals is soaring, sparking an epidemic of dog-related crime which has seen the number of animals seized by police nearly double in a year, and a three-fold increase in people needing hospital treatment for bites.

The explosion in popularity of so-called "weapon dogs", which are brutalised and trained by their owners to make them more vicious, has led animal welfare groups and politicans to call for urgent measures, including new laws, to tackle a phenomenon that threatens to overwhelm animal refuges.

The situation in some London boroughs is already "out of hand", The Independent has been told. Each month, dozens of animals – many of them maimed in fights with other dogs owned by gang members – are taken to Battersea Dogs Home and veterinary hospitals run by the RSPCA."


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/demands-grow-for-weapon-dogs-to-be-brought-to-heel-1817716.html

Let's hammer the owners, not the dogs. It's really sad to see these fine dogs continue to be the butt of abuse and demonisation.

[Indian Summer]

People should need to have a licence to own a dog. People with criminal records (at least for violent offenses) should be refused a licence. And dog breeding should be banned.

[Toast]

People should need to have a licence to own a dog. People with criminal records (at least for violent offenses) should be refused a licence. And dog breeding should be banned.

:yes: All pet breeding should be banned.

I saw something about this on the local news last night, they showed two youths punching the dogs in the face to get them angry so they would fight each other.:furious:

[Sevenseas]

:yes: All pet breeding should be banned.+1

Some VB members would have a problem with that though :rolleyes:

[Almeria]

:yes: All pet breeding should be banned.

I saw something about this on the local news last night, they showed two youths punching the dogs in the face to get them angry so they would fight each other.:furious:
I agree with all pet breeding being banned.

[Poppy]

:yes: All pet breeding should be banned.



:yes:

[Dark Lord]

purly out of interest, can you guys give some reasons for being against breading? are you against the idea of domestic animals, or is it something else?

I have seen alot about pure bread dogs having terrible medical problems, to the point where it is cruel to bring them into life like that, but otherwise I am sturggling to see your view. please enlighten me

[Toast]

purly out of interest, can you guys give some reasons for being against breading? are you against the idea of domestic animals, or is it something else? I have seen alot about pure bread dogs having terrible medical problems, to the point where it is cruel to bring them into life like that, but otherwise I am sturggling to see your view. please enlighten me

Breeding companion animals or buying an animal from a breeder means that one of the many unwanted pets in rescue centres won't be adopted. These unwanted pets are kept in cages or can be euthanised if there is no space. I'm vegan and vegans don't support the pet breeding industry so I would only adopt an animal from a rescue centre. Some vegans don't believe that any animal should be kept captive by humans so they wouldn't have a pet at all.

[mlp]

I'm against breeding until such time as all companion animals have good homes. At that point, I have no problem with carefully controlled breeding, combined with measures to ensure that only people who will provide good homes can adopt animals. The breeding should never be done for profit, though - that just leads to problems.

Although I have rescued birds and love them dearly, I think that the keeping of birds as companion animals is so extremely unnatural and limited a life for birds that I would like to see that practice die out completely.

[Sevenseas]

purly out of interest, can you guys give some reasons for being against breading?-there are already so many animals in need of homes that breeding even more seems very irresponsible. I don't think there are any "responsible breeders".

-I consider the whole process of producing animals for us to use as companions as objectifying and strange.

-with more animals bred, there is also more demand for animal products to feed to some of those animals. There is also a demand for more animal experiments for veterinary science.

-even some of the more educated "pet-owners" will still do things to their companion animals that they would never do to proper family members, such as: kill them for less than sufficient reasons (mistakenly calling it "euthanasia"); ignore their social and psychological needs or otherwise ignore them when a human baby is born into the family; not use all the money they could on veterinary care. Simply put: we are humans and not non-humans, and so there is always a strong tendency to favor our own kind over the non-human kind in our families.

[Wolfie]

People should need to have a licence to own a dog. People with criminal records (at least for violent offenses) should be refused a licence. And dog breeding should be banned.

:up:

But, at the same time, good dog owners shouldn't be limited on the number of dogs they can have.

[Wolfie]

purly out of interest, can you guys give some reasons for being against breading? are you against the idea of domestic animals, or is it something else?



There are too many dogs, purebred and mutts alike, sitting in shelters or being killed for lack of space. I am for banning breeding until such time as overpopulation is under control. Unlike many others here, though, if every dog has a home, I have no problem with breeding. I never want to be dog-less. Selfish, maybe, but I think my dogs would agree they have it pretty damn good here.

[Sevenseas]

There are too many dogs, purebred and mutts alike, sitting in shelters or being killed for lack of space. I am for banning breeding until such time as overpopulation is under control. Unlike many others here, though, if every dog has a home, I have no problem with breeding. I never want to be dog-less. Selfish, maybe, but I think my dogs would agree they have it pretty damn good here.Do you believe in vegan diets for dogs?

[Glitterpixie]

"The number of dangerous dogs used by criminals is soaring, sparking an epidemic of dog-related crime which has seen the number of animals seized by police nearly double in a year, and a three-fold increase in people needing hospital treatment for bites.

The explosion in popularity of so-called "weapon dogs", which are brutalised and trained by their owners to make them more vicious, has led animal welfare groups and politicans to call for urgent measures, including new laws, to tackle a phenomenon that threatens to overwhelm animal refuges.

The situation in some London boroughs is already "out of hand", The Independent has been told. Each month, dozens of animals – many of them maimed in fights with other dogs owned by gang members – are taken to Battersea Dogs Home and veterinary hospitals run by the RSPCA."


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/demands-grow-for-weapon-dogs-to-be-brought-to-heel-1817716.html

Let's hammer the owners, not the dogs. It's really sad to see these fine dogs continue to be the butt of abuse and demonisation.

Don't believe the hype. The RSPCA along with the met police are currently running a stupidly irresponsible campaign against 'status dogs' (whatever they are?) in order to try and scare people into supporting new laws. New laws like the one the deputy major of policing in London, Kit Malthouse, has been campaigning for - to BAN every single bull breed in new BSL legislation. There is absolutely no evidence that these so called 'weapon dogs' are running around the streets of London biting people, they are a pawn in the propagana game certain groups in London are playing -

"Weapon dogs?

Could we do a BETTER job of ‘branding’ these dogs, because, you know, I think there’s still one or two of the thuglife on the street who haven’t heard yet.

Let’s call them; ‘Pyscho dogs’ – ‘Street killa’ – ‘Nike dogs’ – ‘Thugz dogz’ – ‘Beast dogz’.

Because the ONLY job being done with ignorant, ill informed and, frankly, despicable statements like this is creating a DEMAND for the dog from the very people they’re moaning about.

By banning something, by whipping up a frenzy about it, by ‘branding’ it, you create a DEMAND for it from the exact demographic you are complaining about.

The history of the world teaches us lessons in this respect.

When you get a locality which becomes a hotspot for suicides, the media coverage and ‘hype’ adds to the problem. We know this to be true.

When you give certain media coverage to the types of teens who enter schools and take lives, it adds to the problem. We know this be true.

When you stick a label on a record ‘Parental Discretion is Advised’ you may as well have done the marketing yourself, to the demographic who you are trying to ’shield’.

When we spit up a frenzy about ‘weapon dogs’ you are, I guarantee, whetting the appetite for these breeds by the demographic who are responsible for the suffering.

Ignorance may be bliss, but it leads to an exacerbation of the problem.

These labels don’t help. They hinder.

Let’s remind ourselves of some definitive facts:

Cruelty to animals is a crime.
Deliberately intimidating people (with dog or without) is a crime.

So, how about this for a radical idea – if you catch someone being cruel to a dog, you prosecute them under the laws that were put in place for that crime. If you catch someone deliberately intimidating people (with a dog or without) then you prosecute them under the laws that apply. Simply going on ANOTHER dog killing spree will not only fail to resolve the problem, it will spell disaster, resentment and any of the many THOUSANDS of responsible owners of beautiful bull breeds whom Matlhouse would like to ‘gently phase out’, you might want to contact him and let him know your opinion on whether you should be forced to ‘learn to love the Labrador or Pug’.

It is already a crime to do what these youths are being accused of.

A continuation of the failed policies of the Baker government will spell yet more failure.

That there are people who hold these views and happen to have a position of power, makes me – genuinely – ashamed to share the same planet as them, let alone the same country"

http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4272/question-of-the-day-is-londons-deputy-mayor-for-policing-the-biggest-moron-in-britain/

[das_nut]

*sigh*

Why do they keep trying to ban breeds of dogs?

[MrFalafel]

It does seem like a dog licensing and strict enforcement of licensing would give police the power to stop and seize any dog which could be very effective in weeding out the good owners from the bad.

We can't just continue with the current legislation and process as its proven to be not effective. We need to enpower power police to seize and impound unlicensed dogs to at least to begin to address this growing problem.

[Pan]

I'm against breeding until such time as all companion animals have good homes. At that point, I have no problem with carefully controlled breeding, combined with measures to ensure that only people who will provide good homes can adopt animals. The breeding should never be done for profit, though - that just leads to problems.

+1

I agree with this. I love my fur kids dearly and thinking about a life without them makes me very sad. If you stop all "pet" breeding then future generations won't have those adorable little balls of fluff to cuddle with.

Also, some breeders (not all, but some) are breeding dogs and cats to breed out deformities and medical problems. A true breeder breeds only the best examples of a given breed, to pass these genetics on to future generations and hopefully breed out any problems (hip problems, breathing problems, etc).

[Sevenseas]

If you stop all "pet" breeding then future generations won't have those adorable little balls of fluff to cuddle with.Exactly. It's all about the owners and their need to have non-human companions around. It doesn't matter how much it costs in terms of the wildlife killed by outdoor cats or the "farm animals" killed to feed dogs and cats and other omni- or carnivores, or the animal experiments, or whatever.

I write this comment as someone who deeply adores cats, by the way. I just see the time I've spent with cats and dogs as an undeserved privilege, not a right.

[Toast]

Exactly. It's all about the owners and their need to have non-human companions around. It doesn't matter how much it costs in terms of the wildlife killed by outdoor cats or the "farm animals" killed to feed dogs and cats and other omni- or carnivores, or the animal experiments, or whatever.
I write this comment as someone who deeply adores cats, by the way.

:yes: I agree. I have six cats and two are rescues but I think the world would be better if humans didn't have pets at all. I would like to rescue more cats from a rescue centre but I am concerned with feeding them meat. (I can't imagine my life at home without my animal companions though.)

[Sevenseas]

I would like to rescue more cats from a rescue centre but I am concerned with feeding them meat.I would say rescue them anyway. It's not their fault they need meat to survive. They're eating something at the rescue center too, at least until they're killed :(

[Toast]

I would say rescue them anyway. It's not their fault they need meat to survive. They're eating something at the rescue center too, at least until they're killed :(

Well yes, that is the conclusion I have reached too. I probably will rescue more cats when I have the funds. I would like to also rescue pets that could safely be fed a veggie or vegan diet but I don't have the space in my house at the moment.:( I would worry about scaring a new dog with six cats too.:D

[mlp]

I agree in the viewpoint that the time I have spent with various animals is a privilege, rather than a right.

On the other hand, I don't think that our moral justification for working toward the extinction of domesticated species is any better founded than our moral justification for working toward the extinction of the Siberian tiger or the polar bear. Sort of smacks of a "I brought you into the world, so I can take you out" mindset.

[Sevenseas]

The extinctions of many wild animal species would not be bad just because humans would miss certain qualities in the world (which qualities the non-humans themselves don't really give a **** about), but because there are negative consequences to the ecosystem. I'm not sure the same can be said for domesticated species, especially companion animals. With cats in specific, it seems the very opposite is true. (But that being said, I'm obviously vehemently opposed to the demonization of cats and its use to support violence against them. Hunters have a habit of doing this. It's a human problem and cats should not suffer for it.)

[Glitterpixie]

It does seem like a dog licensing and strict enforcement of licensing would give police the power to stop and seize any dog which could be very effective in weeding out the good owners from the bad.

We can't just continue with the current legislation and process as its proven to be not effective. We need to enpower power police to seize and impound unlicensed dogs to at least to begin to address this growing problem.

I agree that the current legeslation needs throwing out. However I would give no more power to the police until they sort their act out and stop dogs dying in police kennels and stop killing innocent dogs in 'error'. Seizing and impounding safe dogs with the wrong paper work would also be a rather counter productive thing to do as the stress of the whole process can lead to serious behavoural problems in some dogs. A large fine for the owner would be a more sensible approach.

[mlp]

The extinctions of many wild animal species would not be bad just because humans would miss certain qualities in the world (which qualities the non-humans themselves don't really give a **** about), but because there are negative consequences to the ecosystem. I'm not sure the same can be said for domesticated species, especially companion animals. With cats in specific, it seems the very opposite is true. (But that being said, I'm obviously vehemently opposed to the demonization of cats and its use to support violence against them. Hunters have a habit of doing this. It's a human problem and cats should not suffer for it.)

I understand your point, but I think we're driving so many species to extinction that often the net effect of the extinction of one species on the ecosystem is not discernible. For instance the giant panda - will its extinction have any impact on the ecosystem? (The same holds true of many of the large predators - their extinction, or near extinction, has been counter balanced by our own predation.) Yet, to me, the extinction of the panda seems to be a sin and a tragedy in and of itself, even if the human species were wiped off the face of the earth overnight, leaving no one with knowledge that the panda had ever existed.