roaringmouse

I'm not really into cats either, though they're the lesser of two for me.

carolinephillips

Don't forget that people lie about the dog's breed to get round regulations, and often call a pit-bull type dog a staffy cross or similar. If you blanket ban, then you drive the practice underground. Have them neutered, chipped, muzzled, and have huge fines for those that are caught disobeying. (I do believe the UK does have some regulations about pit bulls.) But how do you police it effectively??

Dreamy

The UK has Breed Specific Legislation - here's the RSPCA's view on it.

Breed Specific Legislation in the UK

cresta57

Don't rise to his bait! It was a pathetic dig at the "uncivilised" U.K

Zen10

Thanks Dreamy - much appreciated. Interesting that the RSPCA doesn't support the Dangerous Dogs Act. I just read through the entire Act. It seems so clear in its goal of banning the breeding and possession of these animals that I wonder why 21 years later there are still pit bulls in Britain. Obviously, as Caroline has mentioned, the terms of the Act are easy to evade.

Zen10

Another mind-reader On British Expats. Perhaps you should set up a little tent in a fairground and charge $5 a go? - A moderator as well, I see. You should know better than trying to stir up arguments on threads. If I think allowing these things in a country is uncivilised I will say so. It is a perfectly reasonable position to take. My view is that Australia also adopts this uncivilised attitude as it prohibits only the importation of them, as far as I can tell without reading the Act.

Zen10

It could be self-policed if the punishments were severe enough to make people fear the law, but they're not. If possession, proved by DNA testing, meant 10 years in prison, preceded by a 12 month amnesty, they would disappear within a couple of years from our society. People who doubt the capacity of these things to harm people should take a few moments to look at their victims on Google. I'm adding in edit that the damage caused by these animals is severe and only those with a strong disposition should look. It shocked me. I thought they just bit people and didn't let go, but they actually tear people to pieces.

petensue

i agree what do you do about people that lie about the breed?Also what about people like me who has a rescue dog that was described as a staffy cross.If there was a ban and I had to prove he is not a pit-bull how could I even though he is not?I have no papers apart from the rescue place and even they could not agree on his breed?I am sure this does happen in some states which is such a waste of money when the dog has done no wrong just the ranger has seen a dog and thought it might be a pit-bull.My dogs are neutered and chipped.I agree some dogs should be muzzled when out but what about attacks in the home?

I think some people should be never allowed to own a dog of any type so I don't know what you can do about that?

Briar

Petensue I totally agree with you that there are some people who shouldn't ever own dogs at all. Unfortunately a lot of these people also have children! Scary!

eddie007

I know a lot more people who should never have children, than people who should never have dogs... though its the dogs that get the bad press again isn't it

Zen10

And can vote.

cresta57

Here's what you wrote:
One does not require a crystal ball to read the blatantly obvious especially when, as a moderator, I get to read so many of these blatantly incorrect little witticisms. The U.K had a dangerous dogs act n place before any of those so called civilised countries you mentioned ergo it's a wind up. The alternative is you're not as informed as you lead us to believe, your choice

Zen10

I can readily admit I do not know the history of dangerous dog acts across the various countries of the world. Sadly, the presence of an act in Britain does not stop me from considering it quite uncivilised on plenty of other grounds.

Zen10

People might be interested in this story from today:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...rns-RSPCA.html

cresta57

Did you just pluck those countries from the ether? France hasn't banned them outright neither has the Netherlands. I can't be bothered to check the rest.
In summary France requires that you be over 18 with no criminal convictions to own a dangerous breed. The Netherlands have, in fact, repealed their policy on dangerous breeds altogether having found dog attacks were not limited to these so called dangerous breeds.
France here:
Netherlands here: