dogs off leads petition

[Alan Dale]

removed

[Asset]

oh my gawd - not that tired old comment again, come on people get real. Cars kill far more children than dogs!

[James]

Right. I think you have a phobia of dogs. That is "an irrational, persistent fear."

Here, I looked it up on Wikipedia for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobia

[Alan Dale]

removed

[Administrator]

Stay on topic please

[louisiana]

Annasfield Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Blimey - this is all rather heated. I have been

> following this thread all afternoon and I must say

> that I think that certain people?s attitudes to

> dogs are despicable! I often walk a friend's dogs

> and trust me, if they were simply to run past

> someone and then were kicked I would have no

> issued in reporting that person to the police.

>

> I agree that dogs should be kept under control,

> but keeping them on a lead in a park? Perhaps

> people who are that worried should stay at home,

> wrap themselves in cotton wool and never eat hot

> food ? just incase they scald themselves!

>

> If you?re ?attacked? by a dog or a person, you

> have every right to defend yourself and I see no

> problem in doing that. I think you should define

> attack Alan Dale ? does this include brushing past

> your legs?

>

While dog shit is an issue (I stepped into yet another animal turd at the weekend, which made it's way into the kitchen before I realised - urgh!!- and I'm now Dulwich Park, as opposed to having a daily hike across the turd-drenched Goose Green - argh!), threatening and actual behaviour is the real problem.

I am a full-grown 47-year-old adult, but am absolutely terrified of many medium-large dogs. Why? Because of vicious dog attacks I have experienced.

For example, one attack resulted in me getting my right hand sewn up in A&E one afternoon, and having to take a range of unpleasant drugs and attend a variety of clinics. Luckily, while the dog went though my hand near the wrist, it had not severed the important pipework in my hand/arm that I needed to pursue my profession (writing). Just as well: I don't imagine the dog would have paid me compensation for less of earnings.

A more serious attack took place not a million miles from here, and resulted in me losing a sizable segment of my lower leg, following multiple emergency operations by a senior surgeon at St Thomas's hospital (several weeks in hospital, forced to move back home by hospital to receive daily care from my family for 6 months, 6 months of daily salt baths, 9 months on crutches etc.) It took around a year for 80% of the area to grow back, but I still have, nearly thirty years later, a massive and highly visible scar on show to the world every time I wear a skirt, and no there was no plastic surgery on offer, or any compensation, and the whole area is still very thin and papery discoloured scar tissue.

I'm lucky - timely last-minute surgery meant I didn't lose my whole leg, which was a distinct possibility at one point (Tommys was crap to begin with, but then the senior people got involved and saved the day); the dogs didn't bite my face; and I wasn't a young child, where the same injuries might have resulted in death.

Both attacks were completely unprovoked, and carried out by mongrels, not the so-called dangerous breeds. One of those dogs had attacked some 13/14 people before me (according to police estimates at the time), including children and adults, often with serious consequences (hospitalisation). It went on to attack several others. While that particular dog was eventually put down (finally seriously attacking the police officer and RSPCA officer who went in search of it), the woman owner continued to own (but not control) other similar dogs, and cared little about the damage they did 24/7. There was, at that time and to my knowledge, nothing to prevent such a person from owing more dogs.

All dog owners claim to be responsible (just like all car drivers claim to be above average/good drivers), but responsibility is in the eye of the beholder. It's shocking to see a dog owner laugh when their dog rips through your clothes and takes a large piece of flesh from your body. I wouldn't believe it had I not seen it with my own eyes. But on this and other occasions (including recently on LL), I have seen dogs used by owners (or owners' children?) as a threatening weapon. Dog owners seem to think it's really funny that people are afraid of their dog(s). They enjoy it when their dogs behave threateningly towards other people. What is that about?

If a large dog runs towards me and jumps up, or lunges towards my face, mouth open (snarling or barking or otherwise), I absolutely freeze. I am completely filled with terror. The experience is worse than just about anything I have known (and I've been in ground bombing in war zones and worse, hey). If I were not filled with such terror, I'd kill the animal, instantly.

So next time you're walking your dog...

[James]

I don't like people who have an irrational hatred of innocent dogs, seagulls and flies. So how about we do a deal?

You have a no-dogs area in the park* and I'll have an area that's off limits for people who hate dogs. Of course, then we'll have to have an area for people who don't like yummy mummies. Then we'll have one for people who don't like children. And a tarmac area for people who hate grass. Actually, why don't we all live in a hermetically sealed bubble so that we never have to go anywhere near anything that doesn't please us? Even better!

Or we could just all agree to live and let live. Hmm.

*Actually there already ARE several areas which dogs are not allowed to enter. Which is fine by me.

[SeanMacGabhann]

James . Im surprised you had no sympathy for louisiana s post. I understand her pov all to well

louisiana. James has pointed out his dislike for the sort of doh owner you describe to be fair.

its not easy for a neutral to know a good dog or owner until its too late unfortunately

[James]

Louisana, if what you say is true it's dreadful, shocking and we need more legislation to stop people like these owning dogs. I think they should be jailed for a minimum of several years.

But you are generalizing about dog owners & dogs in a shocking way. To suggest that we are living in constant risk of any dog behaving like this is pure fear-mongering.

I fully sympathise with what has happened to you but I fear your judgment has become clouded by your own unfortunate experience.

[mockney piers]

Sorry James, it was a bit juvenile of me, but you were doing a straw man and they have an amazing ability to irk me, even when down the reasonable end of the scale as yours was.

For my tuppeneth's worth I don't think there should be any sort of legislation regards this. We've already have enough 'anti-social' laws passed by this short-sighted government and another approach is needed altogether.

As for dog's I happen to think them rather lovely, and it would be a pity to start alienating another section of society (their owners, I like dogs but they're not 'that' bright) thanks to the actions of a few. If you're interested I too was bitten on the face is a mere 4 year old but have suffered no lasting trauma.

This is not to say ther aren't issues need addressing but further criminalising normal society is not the way forward.

[Asset]

Louisiana has been fantastically unlucky and I empathise with her but I've managed to get through my life without once being attacked by dogs as have most people.

Not intended to be an inflammatory comment before anyone gets their knickers in a twist, just another observation.

[Huguenot]

Well my wedding this weekend was almost ruined by a highly trained dog controlled by a highly trained police officer when it decided to try and take a chunk out of my four year old niece's arm. Great hospital trip that.

I struggle to accept that someone's indulgence in a cuddly wuddly woodly doodly carnivorous killing machine 'because it's trained' outweighs the rights of people to walk the streets unmenaced by their presence.

However, because I'm reasonable I have a compromise: put it on a leash.

If that is unacceptable, then I present the following Socratic argument:

For those who own dogs that commit crimes, their punishment should be identical to that which they'd receive if they committed the crimes themselves, including life imprisonment without parole for those that attack children and adults, and eight years for GBH for those that simply bite an stranger in an unprovoked assault.

If dog owners aren't prepared to accept that deal themselves, then they effectively accept that they can't control the dog.

QED

[mockney piers]

That's just the poiont though. Those laws are slready in place. The owner of the dog that savaged her granddaughter to death got serious prison time, and think how guilty she must to feel.

I'm all in favour of licensing the right to own a dog, with the requisite tests etc. But yet another in yer face piece of knee jerk legislation moving towards a state where all requisite behaviour is stamped down in law is moving towards a police state, or the United States; I forget which.

[Ganapati]

Sorry has to be said--this thread has gone to the dogs. Asset--didn't mean to offend. Just bemused by comments about parents making their children fearful of dogs. I actually love dogs (certain breeds aside) and was saddened when my oldest always shrank away in terror from them. But that English bulldog she had a run in with really did sneak up from behind. Dogowner--I wish more dog owners were like you!

[Asset]

exactly - as I said about 2 million pages earlier, health and safety gone mad.

Man's best friend and all that.......

[Asset]

the exactly was to the previous post!

Ganapati, as I said I've given my son a fear of wasps by myself freaking out like a lunatic whenever one comes near, I can't help it, and I have seen parents engendering a fear of dogs in their children by being fearful themselves. I didn't mean all fear stems from the parents or that all parents do it.

Anyway I'm bored with this thread now and won't be coming back - see you all somewhere else.......

[Huguenot]

That's not right Mockers, the father of Ellie Lawrenson got eight weeks for owning an illegal dog. It had already savaged a neighbour and he had merely received a reprimand for failing to control it properly.

I say he should have received life.

The deal isn't balanced according to the logic of the dog owner. If they're 'under control' then the owner should be punished accordingly. If they're not 'under control' then put it on a leash.

Leashing dogs was the issue of the original poster?

[Mark]

Blimey! I was bitten in the face by a dog once when I was eight, still have the scars. Love dogs now though but do find a teeny minority of dog walkers in the city rude, especially that one a couple of weeks ago who became aggressive when I told him and his dog politely that they were in a dog free area on Goose Green. And the fat guy with the two big husky dogs who became rude when I told him they shouldn't be in the dog free area, I don't care if he works for the Parks Department.

Anyway, if you think it's unfair of Southwark Council to impose "a borough wide blanket Dog Control Order that requires all dogs, regardless of size or temperament, to be kept on a lead except in a few designated 'dog exercise areas" go to this site http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/Southwarkhowl/index.html

[Asset]

------------------------------------------------------

> The boosboss Wrote:

>

> The wikapedia discription of Pit Bull type which

> includes Staffordshire Bull Terriers, may have

> some credance in the US, but that description is

> not recognised by any official UK agency, be it

> government or animal welfare.

>

Couldn't go without popping this on for Boosboss:

Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 relates to dogs of the type known as the pit bull terrier. The High Court has decided that for a dog to be a pit bull type, it must have a substantial number of the physical characteristics of a pit bull terrier. These characteristics are listed in a number of places, and probably the most comprehensive (and that generally relied on by Courts) is the American Dog Breeders Association?s Basis of Conformation for the American Pit Bull Terrier. This is a functional standard which describes the ideal, and so the dog does not have to conform in every detail to be regarded as a pit bull type. DEFRA has produced guidance which summarises some of the main physical aspects of a pit bull terrier

From the Kennel Club.

[david_carnell]

I apologise if this has been mentioned in the previous five pages (it would have taken some while to get through it all and heard the same arguments over and over) but I would like to raise an issue that is aside from the rights and wrongs of dog ownership and it's "dangers".

Peckham Rye, which I assume would be covered by this ban, is a common i.e. a piece of common land. This entitles the surrounding community to have certain entitlements. Traditionally these have taken the form of being allowed to take their animals to graze (we're talking sheep and cattle rather than poodles I imagine), the right to fish, the right to remove sods of turf and limited amounts of wood.

Incidently, if you were able to erect it ina day and set up a hearth you could have your home on a common without contravening planning law but if all of this applies to the land I would think Southwark council would have some trouble passing a by-law ensuring all animals were to be kept on leads.

I would think taking a herd of sheep down to graze on the Rye would highlight the ridiculousness of the councils position. Parks are a different matter however, and the council are well within their rights to issue any edicty on park behaviour without consultation or legal amendment.

[Keef]

I just don't understand a lot of the arguements here... Some are well reasoned arguements, some are extreame. However, most of the "anti dog" arguements seem to be based simply on the fact that someone is afraid of dogs. I don't think that is reason enough to demand they all be kept on a leash.

People are scared of horror films (duh), but they wouldn't demand they shouldn't be shown.. Again, hey'd just avoid them.

Basically, everyone agrees that there are some arsehole dog owners that let their animals sh!t all over the street, and don't try to train them a all. However, most dog owners are responsible, and most dogs won't attack anyone, so why should they suffer????? Because they might bite someone..... Well we are all capable of crime, but we can't all be locked up just in case!

As far as I'm concerned, this law would be cruelty to animals, as it would be denying them the exercise that they really really do need.

[James]

Again, let's put in place a mechanism for punishing people who let their dogs in restricted areas, or allow their dogs to threaten/attack people and/or other dogs. Let's have a clampdown on illegal breeds. Let's even reintroduce a licensing system and random checks to make sure people aren't cooping their dogs up all day without walks. Let's introduce clear guidelines for how dog walkers should behave towards other park users (e.g. if your dog jumps up on someone or nicks their picnic food or intimidates them you could get an on-the-spot fine at the discretion of the "victim"). I would welcome all of this as it would encourage people to take full responsibility for their animals.

It may surprise you to know that I too am frequently irritated by the behaviour of selfish and irresponsible dog users, and I don't think it is acceptable to impose your lifestyle on someone else. I don't want a dog jumping up and wiping its muddy paws on me, growling at me or behaving in a menacing way towards me. When it happens an apology and show of discipline from the owner does the trick for me. But I fully accept that someone not used to dogs might need something more.

However, to give up our animals right to run off-lead in the park as they have always done is totally disproportionate and unfair to those who are respectful of others.

[Mark]

ok, so david_carnell wrote about Peckham Rye being common land and I wrote to the council this morning and asked:

"Is Peckham Rye common land and if so would it be covered by the proposed keeping dogs on leads ruling that may be brought in?"

and this reply came back:

"I am not sure of the legal status of Peckham Rye in terms of common land, but to answer the more specific point, there is no proposal to keep dogs on leads in Southwark's parks and open spaces (including Peckham Rye). This is mis-information.

A full statement will be issued to this effect today"

hmmmm, curious...

[James]

Hooray!!!

[Keef]

HA HAAAAAA!!! (In Nelson from The Simpsons voice).