Page 6 of 28 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 279

Thread: Victoria is Completly ****ed Up!

  1. #51

    Default

    Yes I heard the first legislation changes will be in the Gazette tomorrow. And that later changes will be made in regards to charging the owners of dogs involved in attacks.

    Here is a link to the proposed legislation, this is just minor changes they are rushing through, more will come.

    http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/do...bookmarked.pdf

    These are basically the changes in relation to not be able to register the dogs after September 30th.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keira & Phoenix View Post
    Yes I heard the first legislation changes will be in the Gazette tomorrow. And that later changes will be made in regards to charging the owners of dogs involved in attacks.

    Here is a link to the proposed legislation, this is just minor changes they are rushing through, more will come.

    http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/do...bookmarked.pdf

    These are basically the changes in relation to not be able to register the dogs after September 30th.
    Thanks, now we are getting facts. I can deal with this.

    It seems they are attmepting to prevent ownership at all of a restricted breed in the future if I am interpreting this correctly? To be fair, I haven't checked out the section of the DAA it refers to.

    5 Prohibition on keeping a restricted breed dogFor section 41EA(2) of the Domestic Animals Act 1994 substitute—
    "(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a person who keeps a restricted breed dog— 30
    (a) that was in Victoria immediately before the commencement of the Domestic Animals Amendment (Dangerous Dogs) Act 2010; and
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    Back to the sitting days, to my knowledge, it has to pass through both houses before it can be ratified and passed??

    Do we have any members who are knowledgeable on parliamentary processes here?
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Bush in Tassie
    Posts
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keira & Phoenix View Post
    I understand what you are saying but do not blame the little girl or her family for what happened. The dog followed an adult into the house as the adult tried to run away from the dog because it was charging her. There were several adults in the house during the attack, several adults who tried to stop the dog from killing her, people who also ended up with nasty injuries. Please make sure you do your research before you start ranting on. A little girl is dead and her family are devastated. A mother saw her daughter mauled to death. Think before you talk.

    I also believe the dog should have been PTS, any dog who attacks and certainly any dog that is involved in a death should be PTS no question. But they should definitely do proper necropsy's on the dog and research the dogs life to really get an idea of why the dog acted like it did. You cannot compare humans to dogs, it is just a comparison that will never work. To keep a dog who has killed a person is a huge responsibility, not many people would be willing to take on that responsibility (and you couldn't leave the dog with the owner). Although I strongly believe in the death penalty for humans as well because some of the things that people do to other people are beyond horrific.
    I was NOT blaming the little girl OR her family but there are so many versions of how it happened. It could all have been avoided had the owner been a responsible one. What gives you or anyone else the right to say human life is more valuable than the lives of our best friends? The animals who have always been there for us when we need them.
    I don't believe I was 'ranting' either. I have a young son, and if he was attacked let alone killed by someone else's dog I'd be furious. But not at the dog. Dogs do what we tell them to do, they live to please us. And what do we do in return? Kill them for being a certain breed.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    4,290

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brookenseth View Post
    What gives you or anyone else the right to say human life is more valuable than the lives of our best friends?
    I'm sorry, I do get where you are coming from and I adore my dog and would do anything for her, but I do put a human life above a dog's life.

  6. #56

    Default

    I agree no dog is as worth as much as a humans life.
    If my dogs done it I would pay to get him put to sleep without any question.

  7. #57

    Default

    My apologies, 30 September 2011 is when the actual act takes affect. As has been reported in all them hype news paper articles. My bad.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    4,290

    Default

    This is the complete current section 17 from the DAA 1994 (sorry about the format):

    17 Registration of dangerous and restricted breed dogs
    (1) A Council may register or renew the registration
    of a dangerous dog and may impose conditions
    upon the registration of that dog.
    (1AA) Subject to subsection (1A), a Council must not
    register a restricted breed dog.
    (1A) A Council may register a dog as a restricted breed
    dog—
    (a) in the period that is 2 years after the
    commencement of section 7 of the Domestic
    Animals Amendment (Dangerous Dogs)
    Act 2010, if the dog was in Victoria
    immediately before that commencement; and
    (b) on or after the end of the period specified in
    paragraph (a), if—
    (i) the dog was in Victoria immediately
    before the commencement referred to
    in paragraph (a); and
    (ii) the dog was registered as another breed
    of dog immediately before the end of
    the period specified in paragraph (a).
    Note
    Under sections 10A(4) and 10C(6), a Council cannot
    register a restricted breed dog unless the dog is desexed
    (subject to the exception under section 10B(1)(e)) and the
    dog has been implanted with a prescribed permanent
    identification device.
    (1B) A Council may renew the registration of a
    restricted breed dog.

    Part 2—Registration of Dogs and Cats
    Domestic Animals Act 1994
    No. 81 of 1994
    25
    (1C) A Council may impose conditions on the
    registration or the renewal of the registration of a
    dog under subsection (1A) or (1B).
    (2) If the Council proposes to exercise a discretion
    not to register or renew the registration of a
    dangerous dog or a restricted breed dog that is
    able to be registered or have its registration
    renewed by the Council under this Act, the
    Council must—
    (a) notify the owner; and
    (b) allow the owner the opportunity to make
    both written and oral submissions to the
    Council.
    (3) The Council must consider any submission to it
    before making its decision.
    (4) If the Council has decided not to register or renew
    the registration of a dangerous dog or a restricted
    breed dog, it must serve written notice of that
    decision on the owner.
    (5) The notice must—
    (a) be served within 7 days of the making of the
    decision; and
    (b) give reasons for the decision.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    Ok, my reading of the changes (after reading, re-reading and re-reading it) is;

    - that dogs that are currently registered (or registered by the prescribed time frame) will be ok.

    - dogs that are currently registered and incorrectly labelled will also be ok under the legislation.

    - dogs that are not registered or are brought into Vic (or are born) after the implementation of these changes can not be registered and or owned.

    Is this what others get?
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    4,290

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anne View Post
    Ok, my reading of the changes (after reading, re-reading and re-reading it) is;

    - that dogs that are currently registered (or registered by the prescribed time frame) will be ok.

    - dogs that are currently registered and incorrectly labelled will also be ok under the legislation.

    - dogs that are not registered or are brought into Vic (or are born) after the implementation of these changes can not be registered and or owned.

    Is this what others get?
    Yep.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •