Does something need to be done about dogs?

[sidimmu]

o when are you banning kitchen knives and hand tools, then?
With all the other bans, those are the implements most commonly used for crimes, and often purchased en-route to said deed. Why aren't you controlling their access to these things?

Last time I checked, a knive wont kill anyone without someone being attached to it. Dangerous Dogs can kill without the need for it to be attached to a human.
As GLC put it, guns dont kill people, people do.

Again, we have been over this before, you have used said comparisons and been shot down about them before.

So explain why you're not locking up the owners of these dogs, instead of just fining them a few quid and then letting them go get another one?
Explain why you're doing nothing active to stop the bad breeding of unsuitable dogs in the first place?

Where did I say that? I've never said anything like that, cheers for showing you dont read my replies.

They're not available. They're banned. It's illegal to have them. The problem is solved. Rejoice!!
Just like with Pit Bulls......

Yeah, now we just need a destruction order in place for any that are found. Problem is solved and we can actually rejoice.

The law is pathetic, now?

No, your replies have been wholly pathetic.

If a person's dog worries livestock that person is guilty of an offence... not the dog, the person.

I disagree, both are guilty. Dog deserves to be destroyed, human deserves suitable punishment too.

I've provided plenty of options and points for discussion. You're just not interested because they require money (also covered) and effort greater than signing a piece of paper.

There is a large difference in what should be done and in reality, what can be done.
You're suggestions have been wildly inappropriate and would be a massive drain and waste of police resources. We have been over this a number of times, but you refuse to accept that as logic.
So, yeah, please provide a sensible option and solution because what you have already said has been contested and shot down. All you do is keep badgering at everyone who contested it, probably because you hate being wrong.

 

[ttaskmaster]

Last time I checked, a knive wont kill anyone without someone being attached to it. Dangerous Dogs can kill without the need for it to be attached to a human.
As GLC put it, guns dont kill people, people do.

People are held legally liable and culpable for the behaviour of their dog, just as they are for their behaviour with a knife, car, gun, etc... so it applies.

Again, we have been over this before, you have used said comparisons and been shot down about them before.

Same for your arguments, yet you persist with them.

Where did I say that? I've never said anything like that, cheers for showing you dont read my replies.

Show where you've actually addressed these issues, then...
Oh, wait, you didn't. You just stated that people cannot change and left it at that.

Yeah, now we just need a destruction order in place for any that are found. Problem is solved and we can actually rejoice.

Same for all the other undesirable elements of life, yes?
You gonna go for another dog breed next, or are you graduating to a subset of humans?

I disagree, both are guilty. Dog deserves to be destroyed, human deserves suitable punishment too.

How is an animal, lacking moral agency and thus having no culpability, guilty of a crime?
This isn't the 1300s.

Why does an animal deserve to be destroyed, for acting as its nature dictates?

There is a large difference in what should be done and in reality, what can be done.
You're suggestions have been wildly inappropriate and would be a massive drain and waste of police resources.

The only difference is in how much effort people are unwilling to put in.
Police resources are a very low factor, as previously illustrated by discussions around funding a dedicated agency or department. They'd only be used for enforcement activities, half of which they already do as part of other crime initiatives anyway. Besides, under the current system they seem to costs an inordinately higher amount for doing what Battersea can do for about half the money.

We have been over this a number of times, but you refuse to accept that as logic.
So, yeah, please provide a sensible option and solution because what you have already said has been contested and shot down.

Shot down, yes, but never actually discussed.
It's easier to dismiss something without actually engaging with it... just as it's easier to kill something instead of finding ways for it to continue acceptably. I'm sure a rather famous person once wrote a book about such an approach.... I think he was into camping.

All you do is keep badgering at everyone who contested it, probably because you hate being wrong.

I don't care about being wrong, I care about doing the right thing.
We already tried the banning and extermination of dog breeds and it's only gotten worse since. Experts from all walks predicted that it wasn't the solution and so far they've been proven very correct.

 

[Ayahuasca]

Round 218381238721312738123

 

[sidimmu]

People are held legally liable and culpable for the behaviour of their dog, just as they are for their behaviour with a knife, car, gun, etc... so it applies.

No it does not, because guns are not sentient and can choose to fire themselves, where as a dog can choose to attack. How clueless are you?

yet you persist with them.

You are the only one who challenges me, where as everyone challenges you, so no, not the same for my arguments.

Show where you've actually addressed these issues, then...
Oh, wait, you didn't. You just stated that people cannot change and left it at that.

keep reaching, its hilarious and embarrassing for you.

Same for all the other undesirable elements of life, yes?
You gonna go for another dog breed next, or are you graduating to a subset of humans?

Why does an animal deserve to be destroyed, for acting as its nature dictates?

Because countless other dogs and their breeds will show you that is not how nature dictates.
If a dog maims or kills others, it deserves to be put down. no ifs, no buts, no ttaskmaster magical hand waving, they are destroyed.
Why? because its maimed or killed someone, did you read the above?

The only difference is in how much effort people are unwilling to put in.

Nice way of saying, my suggestions is amazing, but everyone else is the problem. yeah, everyone else is the problem...

but never actually discussed.

Countless pages says it has been discussed and I remember discussing in great detail with you and a few other posters why your suggestions would not work.
You as an individual are the reasons why you dont think its bene discussed, because you always just feel like we are attacking you.
Which yeah users have, because of your refusal to listen or to take other ideas into consideration.

I don't care about being wrong, I care about doing the right thing.

Thats a big ol lie.

We already tried the banning and extermination of dog breeds and it's only gotten worse since.

Because they are not destroyed. Destroy them and they go extinct funny enough.
Yeah Ive eard your waffle afterwards of but another breed will be created, and we'll destroy them too. Humans will always do their best to get round legislation for their own gain, you cannot change that and to suggest you can is beyond naïve.

Dont reply to me, I wont read it, you've got 497 replies to this thread, you have no consideration for others or wish to look at a solution, there is only the ttaskmaster solution and you must defend it and dangerous dogs until the end of time, pathetic.
Found my ignore replacement for Dlockers.