All dogs to be chipped by 2016

We've never bothered chipping our sheep dogs, but I'm all for this. All dogs/cats should be chipped. If they made a bigger fuss about it, then everyone would use it as an easy way to re-unite a cat or dog owner with their pet.
 
Last edited:
mattyg said:
No he isn't

He's saying whats wrong with making All owners responsible
Click to expand...

I don't understand what you're trying to get at.

No comment regarding costs?

If people abandoning dogs means that they are likely to get prosecuted and have to pay a hefty fine, it does not take a great stretch of the imagination to see that some people will take the chip out themselves, or even get some dodgy vet to do it for them. It does not gaurantee that abandoning dogs will stop. I am not clutching at straws at all.

If you have any valid argument I would love to hear it, but so far you have posted nothing that isn't flawed in some way, despite your huge red text, thread derailment attempts and occasional attempt to discredit.
 
mmmmmmmmmmmm dog chips with horse burger, coming to a tesco cafe near you soon............................
 
Just looking about for any info regarding health issues. There seems to be plenty about. Here's a quote from PetPlace.com http://www.petplace.com/dogs/the-ir...do-microchips-cause-cancer-in-dogs/page1.aspx

"Studies about the effects of microchip implantation have been going on for about 6 years after implantation. Mild inflammation was noted in some animals but most was gone within 3 months after implantation. There have been some reported adverse reactions in mice and rat studies. Reports surfaced that the glass-encapsulated RFID transponders microchips caused malignant, fast-growing, lethal cancers in up to 1% to 10% of cases in rats and mice. In 2004, a dog was examined for a mass over his shoulder area. The mass was removed and was found to be a sarcoma. Attached to the mass was a microchip."

I'm just quoting the text as an example, I have never visited the site before and I do not know if it is 100% accurate but there seems to be quite a bit to support the chips causing problems. 1 to 10% seems a very high figure to me.

No, I am not scaremongering, I am trying to find out what the truth is.
 
No real comment on costs to be fair.

I can afford to have a pet and all associated costs that go with ownership.
I chose to pay for my pet to be microchipped.

If I was on a low wage or benefits then I may be entitled to use the services of a charitable organisation.

You cant try and poke holes in my argument when yours is based on sketchy health implications and "I dont see why I should comply with the law its not fair I'm a responsible owner."

Great for you maybe you could get your MP to make you exempt from the new laws and just pick on everybody else. Unless you can show us how to spot the difference between a responsible dog owner and a irresponsible owner.

My bets are that it'll be easier to spot most of the irresponsible owners as they will try to refuse to comply.

You want a dog it needs to be chipped.. Can't handle that get a hamster


Dodgy vets removing Microchips so owner can abandon it. Come on this isn't the movies.

This wont stop dogs being dropped of at rescue centers but It may stop them being tied to gate posts and left for dead.
 
Both my dogs are chipped and dont see a problem with that, the only problem for me is

Laws governing dog attacks will also be extended to cover private property, closing a loophole which has meant that dog owners whose animals have attacked people on private property are immune from prosecution.
Click to expand...

A couple of years ago my dog made a nasty mess of a burglar climbing through the window and i deem that as his fault for being thieving scum.

Does this mean if my dog attacked a burglar then i could be prosecuted?
 
shoot1st said:
Just looking about for any info regarding health issues. There seems to be plenty about. Here's a quote from PetPlace.com http://www.petplace.com/dogs/the-ir...do-microchips-cause-cancer-in-dogs/page1.aspx

"Studies about the effects of microchip implantation have been going on for about 6 years after implantation. Mild inflammation was noted in some animals but most was gone within 3 months after implantation. There have been some reported adverse reactions in mice and rat studies. Reports surfaced that the glass-encapsulated RFID transponders microchips caused malignant, fast-growing, lethal cancers in up to 1% to 10% of cases in rats and mice. In 2004, a dog was examined for a mass over his shoulder area. The mass was removed and was found to be a sarcoma. Attached to the mass was a microchip."

I'm just quoting the text as an example, I have never visited the site before and I do not know if it is 100% accurate but there seems to be quite a bit to support the chips causing problems. 1 to 10% seems a very high figure to me.

No, I am not scaremongering, I am trying to find out what the truth is.
Click to expand...

Like I said in a post waay back the BSAVA have been monitoring this for over a decade with nothing conclusive In 1993 7 animals died shortly after receiving an implant. But may not have been due to the impant.

Put into context 100's of dogs die each year soon after eating even though everything seemed normal previous.

Inflammation issues can arise from just having a needle pushed through the skin.

As with breast implants your body can/will/does encapsulate a foreign body which is inside you.

There was also a case were a kitten died immediately after being given the implant however after a postmortem it was found the daft vet had implanted it into the brain stem.

Also as said before how many man made objects are put into the human body everyday during operations.


The only truth you will find is that you must get your dog Microchipped whether you like it or not.
 
troops said:
Both my dogs are chipped and dont see a problem with that, the only problem for me is



A couple of years ago my dog made a nasty mess of a burglar climbing through the window and i deem that as his fault for being thieving scum.

Does this mean if my dog attacked a burglar then i could be prosecuted?
Click to expand...

No the Law is to protect those who have an assumed right of access.

Plus the existing law means your immune to prosecution the new law means they can at least investigate it
 
troops said:
Both my dogs are chipped and dont see a problem with that, the only problem for me is



A couple of years ago my dog made a nasty mess of a burglar climbing through the window and i deem that as his fault for being thieving scum.

Does this mean if my dog attacked a burglar then i could be prosecuted?
Click to expand...

No, They are still fair game
 
The Geezer said:
lolshoot1st
Click to expand...

It's posts like that that make me regret even coming into GD. Do you actually have anything intelligent to add or are you just here for effect?

Matty, I'm not wasting any more of my life going round and round in circles with you, I've said everything I want to.
 
shoot1st said:
It's posts like that that make me regret even coming into GD. Do you actually have anything intelligent to add or are you just here for effect?

Matty, I'm not wasting any more of my life going round and round in circles with you, I've said everything I want to.
Click to expand...

Can I take my tin foil hat of then:D
 
Well its all fine by me then, i don't any reason against a chip.
The only problem is as far as i know and i maybe wrong but they cant update details on the chip.

My dogs were chipped the same time as their 2nd set of puppy jabs, any responsible dog owner wouldn't see a problem with micro chips.
 
shoot1st said:
It's posts like that that make me regret even coming into GD. Do you actually have anything intelligent to add or are you just here for effect?

Matty, I'm not wasting any more of my life going round and round in circles with you, I've said everything I want to.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

My point is the government are considering a law which makes all dog owners responsible, which is a good thing.

But you're the one who seems to have an issue at being questioned whether you're responsible owner or not by having a chip fitted to your dog
 
Last edited:
shoot1st said:
Again an attempt to dismiss my opinions and concerns as being just some crazy conspiracy theory, I wonder why...
Click to expand...

I have no idea a large portion of our work is from dead animals and I'm not aware of any that have died from microchip implantation
 
Last edited:
The Geezer said:
Thanks.

My point is the government are considering a law which makes all dog owners responsible, which is a good thing.

But you're the one who seems to have an issue at being questioned whether you're responsible owner or not by having a chip fitted to your dog
Click to expand...

I think Shoot1st is taking offence at the possibility the Government are calling him irresponsible.

Maybe the Government should have said they are making plans to make all owners MORE responsible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom