Grrrrrrrr
Like the mad dog I am, I've been fuming all day. The subject of my anger? Dangerous Dogs.
A five year old was killed by a dog and her grandmother severely wounded. It is a tragedy (but since when is the death of a five year old girl anything other than tragic?). The dog involved is said to be a pit bull. What's one of them then?
Wikipedia answered me (good old wiki...how I love thee) - pit bull covers a range of dogs, including the American Pit Bull Terrier, but seems also to cover Staffys, English Bulls, Mastiffs etc. What really annoys me, though, is that the term Pit Bull is used in the Dangerous Dog Act itself.
But remember - this is only supposed to apply to pure bred animals. So presumably you can get out of any responsibility if you can prove it's not 100% pure bred. But likewise, if Prince goes and bites someone - whooops, there goes a miniature BULL TERRIER - KILL IT!!!
Now, I believe very strongly in controlling animals, especially dogs. Bullitt is a funny creature, and can be very funny tempered at times (especially with loud people). I would never ever let her be around a child because of this. When she plays with me, we play rough. She will bite and mouth me...because that's how she (and most bull terrier type dogs) plays. If I get a scratch...*shrugs*...if I were worried I wouldn't play with her, or own her for that matter.
I've been bitten by a couple of dogs in my life. Neither of whom where on the dangerous dogs breed list. One time was down to the ignorance of the owner and fear of the dog. The other was my own fault. How can an act protect against either of those occassions? Any dog is dangerous. They are a creature, like a human being. Unlike a human being, however, they have very sharp teeth and powerful jaws. They can't tell an irritating child to get lost. They can't tell the owner that they're scared of all the big people surrounding it. They can only growl, snarl, bite.
We should be educated as to how to raise and keep animals. We should not be banned from owning certain 'dangerous' breeds which are less dangerous than a poorly trained or simply frightened 'safe' breed.
But then I also believe that UK gun laws are insane also. If someone is going to commit an armed robbery, are they really going to be put off buying a handgun because it's illegal to do so? Likewise, if someone is going to purchase a dog to fight with - is he likely to stay away from a banned breed?
It all just makes me angry. People want to blame something for the tragedy. They want to explain it away so they can move on. The media want a catchy slogan to spout. People don't seem to want to learn...I presume because it's just too hard work. Hmph.
A five year old was killed by a dog and her grandmother severely wounded. It is a tragedy (but since when is the death of a five year old girl anything other than tragic?). The dog involved is said to be a pit bull. What's one of them then?
Wikipedia answered me (good old wiki...how I love thee) - pit bull covers a range of dogs, including the American Pit Bull Terrier, but seems also to cover Staffys, English Bulls, Mastiffs etc. What really annoys me, though, is that the term Pit Bull is used in the Dangerous Dog Act itself.
But remember - this is only supposed to apply to pure bred animals. So presumably you can get out of any responsibility if you can prove it's not 100% pure bred. But likewise, if Prince goes and bites someone - whooops, there goes a miniature BULL TERRIER - KILL IT!!!
Now, I believe very strongly in controlling animals, especially dogs. Bullitt is a funny creature, and can be very funny tempered at times (especially with loud people). I would never ever let her be around a child because of this. When she plays with me, we play rough. She will bite and mouth me...because that's how she (and most bull terrier type dogs) plays. If I get a scratch...*shrugs*...if I were worried I wouldn't play with her, or own her for that matter.
I've been bitten by a couple of dogs in my life. Neither of whom where on the dangerous dogs breed list. One time was down to the ignorance of the owner and fear of the dog. The other was my own fault. How can an act protect against either of those occassions? Any dog is dangerous. They are a creature, like a human being. Unlike a human being, however, they have very sharp teeth and powerful jaws. They can't tell an irritating child to get lost. They can't tell the owner that they're scared of all the big people surrounding it. They can only growl, snarl, bite.
We should be educated as to how to raise and keep animals. We should not be banned from owning certain 'dangerous' breeds which are less dangerous than a poorly trained or simply frightened 'safe' breed.
But then I also believe that UK gun laws are insane also. If someone is going to commit an armed robbery, are they really going to be put off buying a handgun because it's illegal to do so? Likewise, if someone is going to purchase a dog to fight with - is he likely to stay away from a banned breed?
It all just makes me angry. People want to blame something for the tragedy. They want to explain it away so they can move on. The media want a catchy slogan to spout. People don't seem to want to learn...I presume because it's just too hard work. Hmph.