Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 138

Thread: Victoria; Seized Dog's Future 'up to VCAT' *BUTCH IS HOME*!

  1. #121
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bayswater, Western Australia
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peter70 View Post
    Are you for real, seriously you need to take deep breaths when writing posts, outing me as a anti pit bill vigilante, lol next thing you'll be defining me as a whistleblower.
    I never said anywhere it was OK to target the Thurstons did I? I do however believe its ok to target those who break the law, again just for those that choose to ignore certain parts of my posts, I DON'T AGREE WITH THE PUNISHMENT
    Sheesh Peter, you should go back and re-read your posts; you paint yourself into a corner, and then you shoot yourself in the foot. You choose to ignore how your posts come across to any reasonable person, and then bleat about how you have been misinterpreted. I would really recommend that you exercise more caution before pressing 'enter'.

    I happen to agree with some of the bits of some of your posts and I have previously stated this. However, you now say 'I never said anywhere it was OK to target the Thurstons did I?' Are you for real? Didn't you say:

    "Wow people, your conspiricy theories crack me up surely you understand its the owners responsibilty, no one to blame here but them."

    "Sorry Webster my opinion hasn't changed, if dogs had been registered on time they wouldn't be in this situation no ifs, buts or maybes."

    "Sorry i dont get it? How is it deceiptful? The council can only act inside its guidlines, as could the owners."

    "All sounds pretty convincing to me NOT. Seems everyone is to blame but the owners? I mean all this information is being provided by a third party, that party being the President of The American Pitbull Association, so it must be true???? as clearly he would have no vested interest in the case???
    If it was all as clear cut as you have me believe i would find it hard pressed that the matter hasnt come under any major scrutiny IMO!!!!!!! . I guess when you leave things to the last minute you put yourself or as in this case your dog at risk, the laws gave you more than 24 hours notice.
    As for questioning my input, just because i have a different view on the matter doesnt mean im not entitled to my opinion and if you dont like it, stiff, dont read it!!!! And in future i'll continue to have have my opinion whether you think im entitled to it, or whether you like it or not."

    "You guys are that blinded that you can't even contribute part of the blame on these owners, who never bothered to register their dog? They wouldn't be in this situation if they had of done the right thing to begin with.

    How sad "mymatejack" that you'd hope it happens to my breed and that your cronies like the thought as well, some dog lover you are, happy to see my breed suffer just so you can beat your chest and say, I was wrong.. If it does well then at least I've obeyed by the law leading up to it and it will be no fault of my own ( or my dogs for that matter) I can't change everything that happens in society, I think they refer to that as the perfect world.

    When you take your blinkers off, you may see that I don't support what's going on but I also won't support those who cry foul when clearly they haven't done the right thing.

    Good call Beloz, "there are heaps of people who don't register their dogs", so does that make it ok when they get caught?"

    Is there nothing in these comments of yours that points the finger at the Thurstons? Nothing there that could be construed as saying that the Thurstons just got what they deserved?

    ricey

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sunshine coast Qld
    Posts
    1,121

    Default

    Just days after the Victorian government ended its amnesty on unregistered restricted-breed dogs, Point Cook veterinarian Karen Davies did something that hurt her more than anything else in her career. She put down a healthy and seemingly well-adjusted dog because of the way it looked.

    Haunted by the experience, she posted an entry on her clinic's Facebook page, which read in part:

    "Today for the first time in 20 years I am questioning if I still want to do this job. My staff and I are all in tears after having to put down our first pit bull under the new legislation.

    "He had been dumped, by an owner who had put in the time for this magnificent dog to be friendly to all, shake hands and worse still licked my face with kisses as he passed … to the unknown dog that now sleeps in the arms of my staff with our tears, may life make you look different next time because in this life that was your only flaw."

    The comments were picked up online and posted on online discussion groups and Dr Davies has now been propelled into the front line of those fighting breed-specific legislation or BSL.

    Council officers are now able to use visual guidelines to seize and possibly put down a dog that looks like an American pit bull terrier or a cross if it has not been registered as a restricted breed.

    "Putting to sleep a perfectly healthy animal that would fit into any happy home for no reason other than he had a label on him because of his looks was dreadful," she said.

    Dr Davies believes that dangerous dogs of any breed should be destroyed. But she points to countries such as the Netherlands and Italy, which have repealed breed-specific legislation, to argue that the current approach does not reduce dog attacks.



    I know Peter is going on about the laws and I agree most laws need to be abided by, but in this case, this nonsense is just that....some ridiculas beuracrat anal dog hater doing something totally inapropriate, which has been shown not to resolve the problem just to BE SEEN to be doing something.

    If they wanna make laws...make them appropriate and be seen to be workable. To force vets to euthanise healthy animals and take away family pets because they LOOK a certain way is racist and discriminatory.

    I dont have a pitty type, but if i did i certainly wouldnt be abiding by their ridiculas law and would do what ever i had to, to protect my property.
    people need to PTS the anal morons who have created this devestating situation and pitty type owners need to stand up for themselves and refuse their anal non workable laws.
    The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated.
    Mohandas Gandhi

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern NSW
    Posts
    3,784

    Default

    I sometimes think the only way to "fight" this is from the inside out...........People who own dogs with the "look" need to be seen with well mannered good Canine citizen in public places and promote their breed in a positive way. A little bit like a lot of the GSD Clubs have been trying to do. And it has lowered the fear of them in general
    It would be a hard road and it needs to be done with Demo's and meet and greets in public environments without the dogs put out there in a positive way....make people see the real dogs. And not the dogs that belong to the idiots who have caused all these problems.

    I find this so frustrating........arguments are just not getting any outcome. Something positive and active needs to be done. Get a Demo teams together and show these dogs off......Good obedience and fun interaction with people. have the friendly dogs out there promoting their "breed".

    At the Dogs day out in December at KCC Park the Amstaff people were out there promoting their dogs, but they gave off the wrong vibes.......Dogs wore leather shields and large spiked leather collars. That will not get the average person to "like" your dog breed. And it is large numbers of people you need to fight this..........It is the average person who need to be disgusted at what is happening. Not just the people who love the breed

    I have been to the USA, where I went to a dog event and they were promoting the Pittbull as a good house dog....they showed the dog amongst kids, pulling carts with kids in the cart, a kid taking the dog through a low agility course, another kids showing one with doing obedience and others walking through the crowds for "meet and greet". That showed positive promoting of the breed. And I bet there were many people converted to the Pitbull/Amstaff on that day.........

    I feel for all these dogs and owners that are caught up in this. I do not mind them at all, but with all this paranoia/neurosis around just across our border, I would never own one or suggest to people to have one. The risk of the dog being taken (lawfully ) is too great.

    I see many aggressive dogs.....I think many dog trainers know of many dog bites that have not ended up in the news. They are done by many different dog breeds. It is just that some bites cause greater injuries or deaths. And that is where size does matter. If you go global though, several deaths have been caused by the smaller dogs, several babies have been killed by small dogs.

    It is just all down to training and management of dogs......AND kids/people need to be educated on how to be around dogs.......If we have this many dogs in our environment it should be part of life lessons......
    Last edited by newfsie; 06-15-2012 at 06:19 AM.
    Pets are forever

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sunshine coast Qld
    Posts
    1,121

    Default

    I will admit, I am frightened of pitty types, I will cross the road and will drive off again if i see one at the dog park but that reaction is due to experience (having been attacked and seen attacks)...not media hype!

    But i have also been bitten by heeler types and avoid them as well but know there not all bad.

    I had a rescued pitty x something who was a brilliant dog with a friendly (but slightly aloof) nature.

    There is a problem with pitty type attacks especially with children or other animals, but these behaviours are not just attributed to pitty types..any dog is capable.

    My thoughts are that these pitty types attract more "big tough type" owners, who want a vicious dog to be an extention of there genitalia when looking to exude a tough demeanor in front of their peers..yes even adults !

    And these types of owners show as much responsibility in dog ownership as do do with their genitalia...none!.

    Its like giving a pop gun to an irresponsible tough guy....or .22 rifle, you can be irresponsible with a pop gun and no one gets hurt, but buy a .22 and its a different story.

    You rarely see a tough guy with a Maltese..

    This is what the great responsible owners of these dogs have to deal with ...being lumped in the same boat as morons who should even own a goldfish, and they are the ones generating the bad press.
    The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated.
    Mohandas Gandhi

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    589

    Default

    You win Ricey, your right im wrong, still wont help the dog in question will it.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bayswater, Western Australia
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cavalierqld View Post
    Just days after the Victorian government ended its amnesty on unregistered restricted-breed dogs, Point Cook veterinarian Karen Davies did something that hurt her more than anything else in her career. She put down a healthy and seemingly well-adjusted dog because of the way it looked.

    Haunted by the experience, she posted an entry on her clinic's Facebook page, which read in part:

    "Today for the first time in 20 years I am questioning if I still want to do this job. My staff and I are all in tears after having to put down our first pit bull under the new legislation.

    "He had been dumped, by an owner who had put in the time for this magnificent dog to be friendly to all, shake hands and worse still licked my face with kisses as he passed … to the unknown dog that now sleeps in the arms of my staff with our tears, may life make you look different next time because in this life that was your only flaw."

    The comments were picked up online and posted on online discussion groups and Dr Davies has now been propelled into the front line of those fighting breed-specific legislation or BSL.

    Council officers are now able to use visual guidelines to seize and possibly put down a dog that looks like an American pit bull terrier or a cross if it has not been registered as a restricted breed.

    "Putting to sleep a perfectly healthy animal that would fit into any happy home for no reason other than he had a label on him because of his looks was dreadful," she said.

    Dr Davies believes that dangerous dogs of any breed should be destroyed. But she points to countries such as the Netherlands and Italy, which have repealed breed-specific legislation, to argue that the current approach does not reduce dog attacks.



    I know Peter is going on about the laws and I agree most laws need to be abided by, but in this case, this nonsense is just that....some ridiculas beuracrat anal dog hater doing something totally inapropriate, which has been shown not to resolve the problem just to BE SEEN to be doing something.

    If they wanna make laws...make them appropriate and be seen to be workable. To force vets to euthanise healthy animals and take away family pets because they LOOK a certain way is racist and discriminatory.

    I dont have a pitty type, but if i did i certainly wouldnt be abiding by their ridiculas law and would do what ever i had to, to protect my property.
    people need to PTS the anal morons who have created this devestating situation and pitty type owners need to stand up for themselves and refuse their anal non workable laws.
    Yes, and I do share my life with a pitty type dog.

    And I would not change that for the world.

    These cowardly and callous ass wipes that want to kill my dog and dogs like him don't just have me to reckon with; the national president of the RSPCA, Lynne Bradshaw, is on record stating that the policy of the RSPCA is against breed specific legislation and that BSL does nothing to lower the incidence of dog bights.

    ricey

  7. #127
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bayswater, Western Australia
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peter70 View Post
    You win Ricey, your right im wrong, still wont help the dog in question will it.
    This is not about me winning or you winning. This is about all us dog owners coming together and working out a strategy and a way forward. If we stop squabbling amongst ourselves, we might just fix this problem.

    Howabout we all join the RSPCA and unite to fight these stupid laws?

    ricey

  8. #128

    Default

    Not sure I can comfortably swing under the RSPCA banner yet Ricey dear but I truley believe that if we all just gathered on the same page for a short time then we would be unbeatable.
    Sheesh .... the day is apon us when we will be told we can not own any dog over 10 kgs and around the corner is the day that the only dog we can own will require batteries.
    GageDesign Pet Photography
    Site still in construction so will post link when it's finished.

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sunshine coast Qld
    Posts
    1,121

    Default

    I am so over do gooders.

    From there high horse they can impact almost every anvenue of our lives with there poisen pens, unreal expectations of the real world and the ultimate goal to somehow feel more powerful than others with there judgemental and erratic personalities.
    The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated.
    Mohandas Gandhi

  10. #130

    Default

    The battle for Butch: council blows $100K on pit-bull dog fight

    The battle for Butch: council blows $100K on pit-bull dog fight

    Ballarat City Council has spent more than $100,000 in a drawn-out legal battle over the custody of a pet dog.

    Butch, the pit bull terrier, was finally returned to his owners on the weekend, more than 10 months after he was seized by council officers.
    We are very happy to have Butch home...Thank you to the public who have looked out for us during the long 10 months and 24 days.

    In an out-of-court settlement late last week, David and Megan Thurston, from the suburb of Canadian, won the right to keep their beloved red nose American pit bull terrier.

    They had not seen their dog for 305 days, as it was detained at an RSPCA shelter in Mornington.
    He returned home on Saturday, with strict guidelines imposed on his owners.

    In a brief statement, Mrs Thurston said the couple were overwhelmed by the support they received from the public.
    “We are very happy to have Butch home and want to thank all our family and friends for their support,” she said.
    “Thank you to the public who have looked out for us during the long 10 months and 24 days.”

    City of Ballarat mayor Mark Harris said it was unfortunate that the process had taken so long, but said the council did not have any other options.
    He said the council had the responsibility of upholding a state government law and that council officers acted appropriately in originally seizing the dog.
    Butch was seized in October last year, just hours after it became statewide law for restricted breed dogs to be registered with councils.
    He was unregistered at the time.
    “They (officers) did exactly what they should have done in acting out the letter of the law. If we had the time again, we would do it exactly the same,” Cr Harris said.
    “We couldn’t pursue it in any other way. People wouldn’t have wanted authorities like us to have too much leeway if we are in charge of prosecuting state government law.”

    Details of the VCAT hearing and subsequent out-of-court settlement remain confidential, but the council’s chief executive officer Anthony Schinck confirmed that the 10-month process had cost council “in excess of $100,000”.
    He said if the out-of-court settlement had not been reached, the case would most likely had gone as far as the Supreme Court.

    “From both party’s point of view, there was an enormous amount of work that went into this. In terms of being able to get to a resolution, it was something that council was not able to do of its own accord,” he said.
    “It’s the law, we had no other option but to adhere to the law, and part of council’s many responsibilities is that we are the caretaker of a lot of different legislation.”

    Pit Bull Association president Colin Muir said it was a great result and thanked the Barristers Animal Welfare Panel for their assistance.
    Last edited by Beau; 08-21-2012 at 12:55 PM.
    If you find yourself going through hell; Don't stay. Just keep on going.
    Beau.

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
  •