Are dangerous dog law plans barking up the wrong tree?
Mar 13 2010 Huddersfield Daily Examiner
Are dangerous dog law plans barking up the wrong tree?
But the problem lies, according to Brighouse vet Martin Stelfox, with irresponsible owners who have no intention of registering, let alone insuring, their dangerous dogs.
Martin, who every week handles animals which have been attacked by dangerous dogs, says: “It’s a complete and utter waste of time. The sort of people with really dangerous dogs aren’t going to get them chipped or insured. You see plenty that aren’t muzzled and those people won’t muzzle them.
“In theory the proposals sound ok but in reality it’s impossible to enforce. The only way it could work is through draconian legislation. The council would have to visit every home with a dog and take appropriate action. That would cause a public outcry.”
And why, in the first place, do people feel the need to own these dangerous dogs?
In short, it’s status, protection, a reaction to the crackdown on knives and guns and even fashion.
Sarah Jane Robinson, Principal Psychology Lecturer at Huddersfield University, explains: “These dogs are status dogs, especially in hard neighbourhoods where intimidation is seen as a value.
“Even very young people are infected with the attitude that intimidating other people with angry animals is a way to acquire respect.
“Legislation that focuses on the breed and ignores the owner isn’t going to work.
“The police have focused on guns and knives. It’s harder to carry knives and guns so possession of a dangerous dog becomes more attractive for these people.
“These animals are the latest street weapons and become like an accessory. Like Paris Hilton who has a miniature dog, this is the opposite end of the spectrum...The law could serve to make these dogs more desirable because they are illegal”.
