who is to blame ?

BBH said:
I think its great of you to take on a rescue staffie with issues, without you he'd be PTS by now. There are just so many dogs in rescue through no fault of their own. The hard thing about rescues sometimes is you don't know whats happened to them, sometimes behaviorists will guess but they don't actually know.

I have 3 rescues, not staffies though, and although one had issues they are all fabulous.
Click to expand...

I know i always do wonder :)

Thats great of you, exactly i wldnt change him if it ment loosin him he is an amazing little fella :)
 
amymay said:
I think you should get yourself some professional advice, RB. I'm not sure the responses here are correct.
Click to expand...

i shall see if she does raise any complaints or if it was heat of the moment anger. He has never attacked anythin whilst he has been with me and is always walked with muzzle on. A friend said they have 3 strikes or somethin ? not sure if that is correct if she wishes to take it further i shall get profesional advice in.

Thank you Amymay :)
 
I think the owner of the dog that killed that little girl in Swindon couldnt be prosecuted because it was on private property so the same rule applies for the OP.

I know they are trying to change the law to protect postmen and legitimate callers so any attack on private property can be dealt with by the courts.
 
Yes I hope the law will be clear, if a burglar breaks in and the Dobes nail him and I thought they would be put down because of this I would send them up north for a holiday:D

I do think legitimate callers though need protection, mine love the postlady as she seems to love them:D
 
CaveCanem said:
It's out for consultation I think - I think it depends on how good your lawyer would be - I'm a bit disturbed by the idea that a dog could be PTS for nailing a trespasser TBH.
Click to expand...

OT but as I understand the consultation doc, there will be protection for legitimate callers ie the postie, binmen, door to door sales, those type of visitors who most people would consider to be coming to the public part of the property (front door or path) Dog owners would have to put in place something, ie fencing that would prevent the dogs getting to parts of your property that callers could reasonably expect to be safe or put up notices warning of loose dogs AND lock the area so people couldn't just wander in so it would become your responsibility to secure the property so that a child for instance couldn't get into your garden easily or ensure that your dogs aren't unsupervised at any time. You could also be prosecuted if your dog bit a visitor that you had invited in - currently that isn't the case and this is the part that I can see problems with as an 'attack' is so subjective and the 'victims' perception of what is an attack (think a large dog flattening a visiting child just as an example)will be very much to the forefront of this legislation IMO.

But rest assured, anyone who passes a locked gate/signage/high fence is still fair game to be used as a full sized tug toy ;)

In RBs case, dog on dog attack is usually treated as a civil issue especially as it happened on A) private property owned by the him and B) the JRT was trespassing. If anybody is on the wrong side of the DDA it is the JRT's owner as technically her dog wasn't in control albeit it wasn't a 'public place'. TBH, RB I would contact the DW first just to ask their advice and get your side of the story across rather than have her ranting and raving to them with maybe some inaccuracies (being polite here) if only to provide a record of the incident in case something else occurs...
 
Is it not different for dogs and people then ? :) he wouldnt harm a person loves the postman he has biscuits haha

Had no more visits as of yet from angry shouty lady
 
I shall duck from the flack and fall out here.....but is it just me that is totally bewildered by RB's propensity for swinging rapidly from half illiterate, barely able to put down anything other than text speak, to well articulated and descriptive sentences???

Odd to say the least, and OK, it is of no real importance I guess, but I do have that slightly uneasy sense that a LOT of people are being led by the nose here. It just seems a shame if people are constantly offering advice, support and good will when all is probably not at all what it seems?

Just pootling off to the air raid shelter before you commence attack.:D
 
Because some of it on my phone other on my laptop ment to be workin so switching between the two dependin on who is in the office :)
 
MrsJingle said:
I shall duck from the flack and fall out here.....but is it just me that is totally bewildered by RB's propensity for swinging rapidly from half illiterate, barely able to put down anything other than text speak, to well articulated and descriptive sentences???

Odd to say the least, and OK, it is of no real importance I guess, but I do have that slightly uneasy sense that a LOT of people are being led by the nose here. It just seems a shame if people are constantly offering advice, support and good will when all is probably not at all what it seems?

Just pootling off to the air raid shelter before you commence attack.:D
Click to expand...

Does it really matter? If you don't like his posts, don't comment and encourage him/her/whoever!!

This is an internet forum - not a chat room or a dating site, I don't think RB has been rude, offensive or weird - has he asked for anyones private information or phone numbers etc, (he hasn't me - Lol!!), - who knows who anyone on here is - as long as we behave and aren't abusive then we are all welcome to comment and contribute.

Not very welcoming is it accusing people - and what is it he's done?
 
I've been made an arse of on this section in particular several times, but I don't really care.
Even if RB is a fake, someone might be reading who could actually be helped by the advice being dished out and if one dog or owner is helped, even if it isn't the OPs, then that's a good day's 'work' for some of us, I'll help anyone on here, even people who have been downright rude to me and have perhaps forgotten :p :p :p
Take the information on the proposed new legislation on dog bites - that's been really useful for me personally and it came from this thread.
 
For the sake of my dog, I have refenced even if it's not my responsibility. I couldn't have my little werewolf escaping next door and terrifying the little kid. Don't care whose responsibility it is, I want my dog safe and I don't want the neighbours reporting the barking/terrified thing to the dog warden.
 
Dobiegirl said:
I think the owner of the dog that killed that little girl in Swindon couldnt be prosecuted because it was on private property so the same rule applies for the OP.

I know they are trying to change the law to protect postmen and legitimate callers so any attack on private property can be dealt with by the courts.
Click to expand...

Trust me on this one, that all dogs are the responsibility of their owners, regardless of whether they are on private or public property. Within a private home, the owner of a dog is responsible, even when there are those who would break in.

Yeah, I'm with you; Madness! :D

Alec.
 
Dont see the problem with Rileyboy explanation, I had also wondered about the difference in posts.

You should see the texts I send from my phone, of course that isn't helped by not actually being able to see it. I should wear glasses but on a proper computer I just make the text bigger :D :D
 
C'Mon Rileyboy, admit it, you're really a bored rich housewife called Pam from Surrey - kids have left home, and your hubby is fat and having an affair with his secretary Steve, and to pass the time of day you come on here and make up stuff about your dogs and horses.

Next you'll be offering half price tarmacing or block paved driveways!!!

Actually, can you really be called Pam, her life sounds quite normal to me!!
 
I_shot_Santa said:
Trust me on this one, that all dogs are the responsibility of their owners, regardless of whether they are on private or public property. Within a private home, the owner of a dog is responsible, even when there are those who would break in.

Yeah, I'm with you; Madness! :D

Alec.
Click to expand...


Caveat:o Scottish law may be different but yes, in England, NI and Wales you are quite right on that as the injured person could sue you for damages - but that would be in a civil case rather than criminal charges! The repercussions of a civil action may be stressful and hurt your pocket but at least you cannot end up doing time, having your dog removed and living with a criminal record as could be the case under the proposed legislation.

Some police officers will try and tell you that various things are a crime in relation to dogs rather than a matter for a claim for financial restitution ie if your dog damaged another in a fight/injured someone by knocking them over/caused an RTA you could be obliged to pay damages. Most people accept that you should take responsibility/pay if your dog has caused the bill!

While I (and probably most responsible dog owners I guess?) have no problem with wider powers to control dogs and their ownership, their is, as always a concern that proposed legislation like this is the thin edge of the wedge so to speak. And will it actually solve the problem? Maybe it will protect callers to a home like a postie but there is the issue of invited visitors that makes me uneasy mainly because there is no clear definition of an 'attack' and quite a big section on the victims 'perception' of such an attack which considering that some people were happy to shove their children into a main road to avoid passing my large dog on a lead is a bit worrying.

OP,

There is a very clear definition between a dog causing injury to another animal and a person in current legislation. Basically, it comes down to the difference between damage to property (which an animal is) which can be compensated financially while injury to a human is a criminal offence. In saying that, if your dog is merrily rampaging around the local park causing havoc while the owner isn't doing anything about it, you can still be breaking the law (DDA) even if nobody is bitten.Legally we all have to have full control of our dogs at all times in a public place - luckily the law isn't heavily enforced as I'm sure many of us could easily fall foul of it (well, I would sometimes as evil terrier bogs off and it takes me 2 minutes to get him back :p).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top