Ditch the “Dog Control Bill” – cited as the ‘Dog Control Act 2008’

The idea is to STOP the government dictating who can "seize and destroy" dogs – ANY dog/s.

We all know there are dangerous breeds, by definition, (see Dangerous Dogs Act 1991[c.65] ) but what this all encompasing DOG CONTROL BILL wants to do is tar every dog with the same brush; and that must not happen.

This ludicrous Bill now defines, "been in an attack if it has bitten, mauled, or injured a person or other animal".  So if your next door neighbour's dog attacks a thief or a fox, some "officer" may seize your neighbour's dog and get it destroyed or perhaps neutered or re-homed. See Article 3 (1) and (2). 

 

Why is this idea important?

The idea is to STOP the government dictating who can "seize and destroy" dogs – ANY dog/s.

We all know there are dangerous breeds, by definition, (see Dangerous Dogs Act 1991[c.65] ) but what this all encompasing DOG CONTROL BILL wants to do is tar every dog with the same brush; and that must not happen.

This ludicrous Bill now defines, "been in an attack if it has bitten, mauled, or injured a person or other animal".  So if your next door neighbour's dog attacks a thief or a fox, some "officer" may seize your neighbour's dog and get it destroyed or perhaps neutered or re-homed. See Article 3 (1) and (2). 

 

Ditch the “Dog Control Bill” – cited as the ‘Dog Control Act 2008’

The idea is to STOP the government dictating who can "seize and destroy" dogs – ANY dog/s.

We all know there are dangerous breeds, by definition, (see Dangerous Dogs Act 1991[c.65] ) but what this all encompasing DOG CONTROL BILL wants to do is tar every dog with the same brush; and that must not happen.

This ludicrous Bill now defines, "been in an attack if it has bitten, mauled, or injured a person or other animal".  So if your next door neighbour's dog attacks a thief or a fox, some "officer" may seize your neighbour's dog and get it destroyed or perhaps neutered or re-homed. See Article 3 (1) and (2). 

Ref: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/1d200809/1dbills/009/09009.i-i.html

 

 

Why is this idea important?

The idea is to STOP the government dictating who can "seize and destroy" dogs – ANY dog/s.

We all know there are dangerous breeds, by definition, (see Dangerous Dogs Act 1991[c.65] ) but what this all encompasing DOG CONTROL BILL wants to do is tar every dog with the same brush; and that must not happen.

This ludicrous Bill now defines, "been in an attack if it has bitten, mauled, or injured a person or other animal".  So if your next door neighbour's dog attacks a thief or a fox, some "officer" may seize your neighbour's dog and get it destroyed or perhaps neutered or re-homed. See Article 3 (1) and (2). 

Ref: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/1d200809/1dbills/009/09009.i-i.html