MoD kills guard dogs because they are not required anymore

So you'd rather they rehomed a dog with behavioural issues which could have then turned on it's new owners?
Then we'd have the "OMG why did the MoD rehome a dog they knew to have issues!!1!!!1!!"
They can't win.
 
It's certainly not very nice, but if they are attack dogs I'm not sure they could re-home them.

It does say that they do re-home where they can and this is a last resort.
 
Prince william should have adopted them... it seems.

Its just a few dogs.... Aggressive, trained to maul dogs. I'm more bothered, only a bit though, by the unknown amount of women and kids that have probably been killed by Syrian Shells of both sides in the past 24h.
 
Sad but probably happens all the time and only on the news because Prince William served on the base.
 
Efour said:
Prince william should have adopted them... it seems.

Its just a few dogs.... Aggressive, trained to maul dogs. I'm more bothered, only a bit though, by the unknown amount of women and kids that have probably been killed by Syrian Shells of both sides in the past 24h.
Click to expand...

Maybe he should have adopted them, yes. I'm concerned about those people too, but I'm also concerned about why we think that we can just put a dog down because it's not sufficient for our human needs. Utter ********

Cosimo said:
Sad but probably happens all the time and only on the news because Prince William served on the base.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but it's still sad.
 
Non story.... they do rehome as a matter of course so these dogs were clearly deemed unsuitable for that by the vet.

Thousands of dogs gets euthanised each year. Sad but sometimes the only option, unless you want to pay for their upkeep?

Im sure all the dog and cat lovers like myself would soon complain if we had to all pay 2k a year so no animal was put to sleep.

I have rehomed 2 rescue dogs in my life, gave them a good life and the best care. I do what i can but current financial and living arrangements mean currently i canot offer a dog a home.... hopefully soon.

What makes me laugh is the same papers would be printing the "irresponsible MOD" if they had been rehomed and attacked someone!

Yes its sad but i would only be annoyed if the MOD policy was destroy all dogs regardless.... thats not the policy so you cant really have a go at them.
 
Last edited:
This is nothing new... it just looks like the media has decided that now is a good time to latch on to it.

Slow news day perhaps?
 
majnu said:
seems the British way of doing things.
Click to expand...

3Ojbvob.jpg
 
you know the RSPCA kill far more dogs than re-home them? there isn't the demand out there and they can't afford to keep them alive. grow up, honestly

B@
 
Last edited:
B@Th*nG said:
you know the RSPCA kill far more dogs than re-home them? there isn't the demand out there and they can't afford to keep them alive. grow up, honestly

B@
Click to expand...


Exactly this, if you want to be outraged, go knock on the RSPCA's door.
 
MooMoo444 said:
Yeah, lets rehome attack dogs trained to kill and incapacitate to family homes. Whats the worst that could happen?
Click to expand...

The dog wouldn't have anybody to tell it to get off the sofa....... because he ripped their throats out.


This is a stupid story that somehow made the front page of The Sun.
if it didn't have the slightest connection to a Royal, then it wouldn't have featured at all.

The dogs were in service before they teamed up with Williams detail.
The MoD wont see these dogs as nice furry pets, they will see them as
£s and Ps, assets, tools etc etc.
I agree putting them down was the most cost effective, risk free solution.
 
As much as I am an animal lover, I am split on this issue.

On one side, they have served the country so should be able to live out their lives.

But on the other side, the animal has been trained to be aggressive and distrust humans (apart from its handler). This means that if it was rehomed it would have such a hard time adjusting. It may get put down for biting a visitor that it thought was a burglar. It just seems that these dogs are too much of a liability to rehome them so perhaps a quick, painless death is the most humane way of ending their service?

There is something humbling to be devoted to something until death. And im not convinced a dog that has been trained and worked all its life as a guard dog would want to be someones pet?

anyway, im rambling, but im still split on the issue
 
nick.lidgett said:
The dog wouldn't have anybody to tell it to get off the sofa....... because he ripped their throats out.


This is a stupid story that somehow made the front page of The Sun.
if it didn't have the slightest connection to a Royal, then it wouldn't have featured at all.

The dogs were in service before they teamed up with Williams detail.
The MoD wont see these dogs as nice furry pets, they will see them as
£s and Ps, assets, tools etc etc.
I agree putting them down was the most cost effective, risk free solution.
Click to expand...

You're missing a separate point, however.

Whether it involves the royal family or not, some of us are unhappy that animals are treated in this way, and it's a wider issue unrelated to the royal family, RAF, or RSPCA.

It upsets me greatly that animals are put down because we think that we can't help them any more. It's a different case entirely when the animal is terminally ill, not that it makes it any less upsetting.
 
Never nice to hear of dogs/animals being put down but if it's the absolute last option then we all have to just be adults about it.

Would be far more productive to create laws where you have to have a license before you can breed an animal.
 
Much better doing this, than re-homing potentially dangerous dogs.
All my dogs that I've had had been ex police dogs, as my stepdad was a dog handler in the police. However, some previous dogs he'd had had to be destroyed at the end of their working life as they wouldn't be suitable to take home as pets after their service. This is exactly the same issue, and as said in the article, it's most likely coincidence that they're getting destroyed at the same time as William leaving that base.
 
Why do they use the word "destroyed" when talking about at animal, particularly a K9?

People never say Destroy when they get rid of an old TV or toaster even a kitty cat... It always seems incredibly over harsh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom