Why the Net has the advantage in the ‘Undies world’
- Shopping blogger Emma Iannarilli
Dog owners facing tough new regulations
Tuesday 9th March 2010, 8:02AM GMT.
Dog owners could be required to insure themselves against the risk of their pet attacking someone, it was announced today.
Government proposals suggest forcing every dog owner to take out third party insurance and to have their dog microchipped.
Ministers are also considering introducing New Dog Control Notices for misbehaving animals.
The “Dogbo” orders would allow police officers and council officials to force miscreant owners to muzzle, leash or even neuter their pets.
In extreme cases the dogs could even be confiscated and given to new owners.
The measures, part of proposed changes to the Dangerous Dogs Act, are aimed at tackling the growing problem of vicious animals being bred for use as weapons.
Ministers are also considering making it a criminal offence for a dog owner to allow their animal to be “dangerously out of control”.
Currently they are only breaking the law if the dog is out of control in a public place.
The change would extend the law to private residences, and could provide extra protection for postmen. There is also concern about the widespread use of dogs as weapons on inner city estates.
Home Secretary Alan Johnson said: “Britain is a nation of animal lovers, but people have a fundamental right to feel safe on the streets and in their homes.
“The vast majority of dog owners are responsible, but there is no doubt that some people breed and keep dogs for the sole purpose of intimidating others, in a sense using dogs as a weapon.
“It is this sort of behaviour that we will not tolerate; it is this sort of behaviour that we are determined to stop.”
Figures uncovered by the Tories suggested 100 people every week are treated in hospital after being bitten by a dog.
The number of cases has gone up to 3,079 in 1997-8 to 5,221 last year.
Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said: “All we’ve really had for the past decade under this Government is a series of speeches and headline grabbing announcements about the things there were going to do to tackle problems like dangerous dog offences.
“But in the end nothing has ever happened. If Labour are re-elected in May all we’ll get is the same tired-out old approach and none of the changes the country really needs.”
But Billy Hayes, general secretary of the CWU, said: “This is a long-overdue, but extremely welcome step.
“We’ve been calling for changes to the law for several years now following some terrible dog attacks on postal workers.
“Many of our suggestions – including extending protection to private land and issuing control notices or ‘dog Asbos’ – are now fully reflected in this consultation.”
Sponsored Links
UK News
Business Awards
Book a Business Awards table
Join our celebrations of the region's best in business on Thursday March 22 - book your table now
Lifestyle
Interactive Dining Out map
Hundreds of reviews by the Express & Star and Shropshire Star's teams to help you decide where to eat.
entertainment
All the film reviews
Before you plan a trip to the pictures, get our critics' verdicts on all the latest movie releases
OUR NEW APP
Get the new E&S app
Download the Express & Star’s new app to your iPad or iPhone to get one week of access to our digital newspapers absolutely FREE.
expressandstar.com
Popular sections
Useful links
Neuter the owners too !
Report abuse
This would cause widespread abandonment of dogs, food for them is already at a high price if insurance and neutering was compulsory it would get as high as car insurance, would be better if restricted to dangerous breeds. Most old people struggle to keep their little companions this would force them to live a lonely life, i do believe all dogs should be chipped though. Think carefully government before you impliment dangerous changes.
Report abuse
Great post!
Report abuse
Ah yes. Man’s best friend under attack yet again….
Meanwhile ferrel cats are allowed to run riot, spreading disease, killing and maiming!
Report abuse
Excellent news.
I’m fed up of the idiots in the Black Country who keep rabid dogs and who have no control over them, and keep them vicious by abusing them. Legislation like this will force those scum to pay for their abuse and for the damage it causes their neighbours and communities.
Hopefully this will force people to think twice before buying or breeding dogs.
Report abuse
no it wont force the scum as you say it will be grannie and her ten year old yorkie who will be made to pay
Report abuse
More spin from an utterly clueless government.
Does anyone really imagine for one minute that your average anti-social chav is going to ‘give the dog a phone’ and arrange insurance for his street-mean bull terrier? Any more than he can currently be bothered to insure his souped-up Vauxhall Corsa? Or pick up the chip wrappers he habitually slings over his shoulder? Or consider his fellow bus passengers when irritating them with thud-thud rap music from his mobile phone?
Once again, this will be yet another imposition upon the majority of law-abiding people who don’t train their dogs to go around snarling at people; but which the misbehaving element amongst our population will once again fell free to stick to fingers up to.
Report abuse
Loony tunes Gordon the Clown and his cartoon has beens…
“The vast majority of dog owners are responsible, but there is no doubt that some people breed and keep dogs for the sole purpose of intimidating others, in a sense using dogs as a weapon. It is this sort of behaviour that we will not tolerate; it is this sort of behaviour that we are determined to stop.”
Why should the majority who by their own admission are responsible, suffer for the minority how stupid will this lot get? The kind of owner that has this large intimidating dog will most likely not buy insurance any way. And what about the little old lady who has a small dog for company has she got to pay out for this irresponsible behaviour. Why can this lot not see it’s the problem that needs dealing with not the majority of responsible owners?
Why does the dog warden not police these people and earn their pay. Here we go again the criminal element gets away with it and the majority suffer.
Report abuse
Once again a picture of a Staffordshire Bull Terrier has been used as an example of a vicious dog. WHY? Most staffies have a very gentle nature with most owners being responsible. We have a Staffie and he is extremely good. Why not use a picture of an Alsation after all these are usually used as guard dogs and allowed to roam free in sites that they are “protecting”. I had two bad experiences from this breed when I was a child and I was literally walking along minding my own business, but it has left me with a phobia of this type of dog. I totally agree with Ray its the owners that need sorting out. Bringing in compulsory insurance for the owners will not achieve that, because it will only be the responsible pet owners that will feel obliged to pay for it. Its not going to solve the problem. Far from it; it will probably create more.
Report abuse
Ray no 5
Totally agree, could not have put it better myself
Report abuse
the insurance idea is a bad idea not thought though.many elderly people have a dog for company,are how they suppose to afford the insurance.i own 2 dogs,they are well looked after and well fed,pet food is all ready expensive and now this on top,there will be a lot of dogs abandond and left to roam the streets.another a brillant idea (not)by this clueless goverment.
Report abuse
So my two rescued dogs a jack russel and a retired greyhound and also our whippet will come under this law, they are hardley a threat to anyone but the insurance cost alone will be extorsionate because insurance companies know you will have to have it. but more to the point there will be more retired greyhounds and other breads in care because no-one will want to take them on because of the extra cost.
Report abuse
a step in the right direction. phil you say “dangerous dog breeds” such as? Any dogs are fine in the right hands.
Insurance is not very expensive and it is just like we have to have insurance on cars just incase something does go wrong isnt it?
Its good practise to take out cover anyway.
Same with microchipping.
Report abuse
What a good idea – I have pet insurance and so do many responsible dog owners. If you cannot afford insurance, you should not have a dog. What if something goes wrong, i.e. your dog bites somebody, or your dog needs medical attention – an operation can cost hundreds/thousands of pounds. Do you just put the dog down and get a new one. I know from experience that many people are responsible dog owners, however, there are a growing number who are not. Take a look around – see the lads walking with staffies, rotties, etc, hitting them with sticks to make them angry – using them as weapons.
The Government need to look at how they can police the issue better and get the abusing scum where they belong.
Report abuse
Certain operations cost so much because the vets charge such extortionate prices.
A vet will only save a dog that needs a certain operation if you can pay for it, otherwise the vet couldn’t care less, kind of like how the healthcare system in America treats American citizens.
There are many cases where vets try any coerce pet owners into getting unnecessary vaccines under the guise of protection but in reality it’s because it keeps the money rolling in.
Just a small fact for you sandra, most bites in the UK are from labradors.
Report abuse
Not sure where you got your “fact” from as there are no official dog bite statistics available in the UK. I was was not attacking a certain breed of dog, my point was that you only have to look around to see that dogs used for “status” dogs are staffies, rotties, etc.
As for vet costs, if you paid the £2.50 a week for insurance, it wouldn’t be a worry should the time ever come.
Report abuse
Try doing some research sandra and you might begin to see some facts for yourself.
Sandra by your reasoning dogs in the UK should have more rights than human beings in America. You agree with it being mandatory to have insurance for dogs, however, insurance is not even mandatory for human beings in America. In America if you do not have health insurance you are left to fend for yourself, the doctors do not want to know, same as the vets attitude over here towards pets whose owners have no money or insurance.
Why should we worry more about the health of an animal than that of human beings?
Report abuse
What facts do I need to research. We are talking about dog insurance and dangerous dogs being controlled, not people not getting the correct medical care in America. I think that may be a totally different debate. You mention about people with no money – the simple answer is they should not have dogs. Owning a dog is costly. Like a car. If you cannot afford, tax, insurance, petrol, you cannot drive a car.
Report abuse
So Sandra just as you say people with no money should not own dogs, I guess you feel the same way about people, those with no money should not have a family or children?
Sandra the last time I checked a dog was not a car, you think just because you need insurance to drive a car you should also need insurance to walk your dog? LOL, just shows what the world is coming to.
Report abuse
Sandra you are talking about worrying more for the health of our dogs then the American Government takes of it’s people.
In America it’s okay for the American people to live a natural life and die a natural death without health insurance or health care.
It’s even okay in this country for people to live and die a natural life with no medical intervention, people of certain religions for example do not believe in medical intervention, they believe in something called fate or destiny!
Sandra what you are saying about making insurance mandatory for dogs is totally ridiculous and last time I checked, a dog was not a car or motor vehicle. You think because we need insurance to drive a car we should also need insurance to walk our dogs? LOL, just shows what the world is coming to.
Report abuse
Don’t know where people get the idea from that this insurance is unaffordable. This type of insurance has been around for years. It usually comes as an addon to vets fees. Normally a liability extra contained in the policy. They are about £10 per month. I suppose if it becomes law the insurance companies will try to cash in on it though.
Agree with your comments Sandra very sensible to have this kind of insurance. Any dog thats a serious threat to anyone or shows any kind of violent behour should be destroyed.
Report abuse
Insurance has been known to increase, we cannot be guaranteed that the prices will not rocket. There’s no problem as long as the insurance is optional, but making it mandatory is a joke, in a matter of time it will only be the wealthy who will be able to keep dogs due to these crazy laws.
Report abuse
The fact that they want all dog owners to get insurance regardless of breed suggests this is another measure being used to con money out of the public at a time when most are already struggling to make ends meet.
Report abuse
This is getting beyond a joke, more control, more restrictions, more money trying to be conned from the public, I cannot believe there are people that are actually in favour of this idiotic idea, they are trying to rip us the people off even more than they already do and there are certain members of the public so brainwashed with government spin they will embrace any new legislation with open arms. Wake up!
Report abuse
Its nothing really to insure your animal against this kind of thing anyway. It covers you for expensive vets bills and liability. I agree it does seem harsh that our government want to make it law. But afterall, employers have to have liability and its also included in your home insurance policies as well. What would you do if you or your child suffered severe injuries from a dangerous animal??
Report abuse
Actually it’s not nothing to insure your animal, it’s something, something a lot of families and pet owners cannot afford in these times of hardship and recession. It’s the working class that are already suffering who will feel the pinch in their pocket.
You need to reaslise a pet can be raised with love or with hate and abuse, it’s irresponsible owners that need putting down, it’s not the dogs fault. A dog will do anything to please it’s master. the sooner people understand this fact the better.
Report abuse
If people can’t afford £2.50 a week, they cannot afford to keep a dog. As I said earlier what if that dog bites somebody or needs medical attention – what then? Even the most well behaved dog can bite. We don’t know if a dog’s in pain or having an off day. They are animals and it would be irresponsible to say that your dog would never bite.
Report abuse
It is sensible to insure your animal. You could be left facing hefty vets bills if not. You can’t always relie on animal welfare schemes. It would be responsible to do this if you want to own an animal. Otherwise you have sick animals with no way to help them.
As for the owners v dogs I think Jonb says it all. There are bad animals and bad owners in this world and to think it’s always the owners who are at fault then thats bad animal management. although if an owner knows the animal is bad then he or she should have the animal dealt with appropriately. Soin this case the owners would be at fault. Owners don’t always make an agressive dog.
Report abuse
Always a what if? sandra, kind of like when the police fine drivers for wearing no seatbelt, what if you crashed, what if this, what if that? If we all thought like you sandra none of us would ever leave our homes, what if we are involved in an accident? These what if’s should not be used as a control to con money from the people.
Report abuse
Stjoe if someone is left facing expensive vet bills is really none of your concern. Many responsible pet owners do not have pet insurance, having pet insurance does not make a responsible pet owner.
Report abuse
Pet owners nowadays have to treat their pets better than their fellow man. If the Government took care of the people as well as it expects the people to take care of their pets, then there would be no poverty or homelessness or unemployment.
If this dog insurance act goes ahead, you can all be rest assured it’s only a matter of time till it’s mandatory to get all of your pets insured, guinea pigs, budgies, etc.
Report abuse
Havn’t heard the famous comment from anyone yet. “There are no bad dogs just bad owners!” I often wondered why I have seen muzzled dogs being taken for a walk. Did the owner teach them to bite? Or is the dog a bit of a handfull and taught himself to bite so that’s why he is muzzled.
Report abuse
In principle a good idea. The responsible and law abiding owners will comply but the ones it is intended for will just not bother. There will alos be a large increse in the stray dog population as people dump their dogs. Shelters, already overun because of the economic situation, will not be able to cope with the influx.
Will rehoming centres have to have dogs chipped etc before adoption and pass on the cost.
Will people on benefit be exempt????
Far too many questions and don’t see how it could possibly be policed
Report abuse
Jonb..Having pet insurance is like having medical insurance in a country with no health system. If you insure your animal it will get the medical treatment it needs. I am sure theres people without this cover that can afford it. Like sandra says if you can’t afford to look after your animal properly and cover it for damage then you shouldn’t own an animal. Same as driving a car really. Having insurance makes towards a responsible owner who knows it would be hard to pay a vet for animal care when it gets ill. So they insure them (Very responsible and sensible to me) And no it’s non of my business i am just making a comment on it so don’t be so rude!!!
Report abuse
Stjoe I would also like to ask you why you think a dog in the UK should have more rights than a human being in America.
In America if a human being does not have healthcare they are left to fend for themselves, the doctors do not want to know, just as the vets in this country don’t want to know about pets whose owners have no money or insurance.
Why should we worry more about the health of an animal than that of human beings in America? If this holy dog attitude continues, maybe one day we can have a dog as the future king of England?
Report abuse
My point is that if you lived in America you would be sensible to take insurance out to protect your families health. Yet in this country we buy an animal and then find it gets sick then we see the size of their vets bill and some people realise they can’t afford to protect their animals or treat them. I have not said an animal has more rights than a human. Just that it is sensible if you want to own an animal to have it protected so you can afford it the same as you would protect your own health, if we had to pay in this country for medical care.
Report abuse
No stjoe there are many that cannot afford to take out health insurance for their families in America, by your and sandra’s reasoning these people should not be allowed to have families!
What about the tribes that live in the jungles of the world, lets go and tell them they cannot have any more children because they don’t have health insurance.
Some people cannot afford their vet bills because the vets are there not for the health of your pet but to make as much money as possible.
Maybe you have not said an animal should have more rights than a human in so many words, but it’s what you are implying.
Report abuse
its a very sad fact that there are bad owners who do not treat their dogs in a manor that would encourage a well balanced and behaved dog. all dogs bite the only difference is the degree of damage done which sparks these kind of statements,
more effective way to deal with people who do not control their dogs or actively encourage them to be aggressive should be a prison sentence for the owner.
jonb
you see some dogs being muzzled when out for a walk because owners of those breeds have been dictated too to do so, not every muzzled dog is vicious. so what other option do they have keep their dogs shut up indoors or kept in a garden no proper exercise?
oh but then they would probably get ripped into for not taking care of their pets if they did that.
Report abuse
Are the government totally oblivious of the current stray dog situation in the UK? Its absolutely ridiculous……107,228 stray dogs were collected by councils according to the 2009 Dogs Trust survey. Every minute of each day, 1 stray is destroyed.
Government needs to be tackling the source of our problems first, the back yard breeders who continue to churn out poorly bred pups and stupidly low prices. The people that see dog breeding as a top up income to the state benefits they receive.
Report abuse
We are talking about dog insurance and dangerous dogs being controlled, not people not getting the correct medical care in America. I think that may be a totally different debate.
You mention about people with no money – the simple answer is they should not have dogs. Owning a dog is costly.
We live in the UK – not the jungle. We live in houses, most people have cars and lots have pets. They are our responsibility. If you or a member of your family were attacked by a dog, I think your opinion may change.
Report abuse
Terrance i think you are way off subject mate. Sure there are people who can’t afford health care or animal care. I am not saying they shouldn’t have kids or animals,but if you can afford it then you should take the sensible option and protect them.
If you want to talk about the rights of people then we can…So you don’t have an animal if you can’t afford it. You don’t have kids if you can’t afford them.It would be unfair to have kids in the USA if you can’t provide them with health care wouldn’t it?? You don’t drive a car without insurance do you? It’s up to people to make up their own minds on the risks they take..but there is always a sensible option if it can be afforded,And if you can’t afford it then do it or don’t at your own risk.
Report abuse