Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: WA's dog laws to change after attacks

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bayswater, Western Australia
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beloz View Post
    A dog owner licensing system is often mentioned on here. I reckon that would make some difference if it is implemented properly.

    And the Calgary model too.
    Lynne Bradshaw, the national president of the RSPCA (who is a West Australian) was interviewed about this sorry case and she made two points. Firstly, that legislation that targets individual dog breeds does not work, and secondly that dog owners need to be licensed and pass licensing tests. Both sides of politics here in WA have shown some reticence to following her suggestions LOL! These stupid overpaid knob heads that are called "honourable members of parliament" prefer to just spout simplistic populist crap that panders to the lynch mob mentality of the talk back radio listening population.

    Fwarkk! The more I know about people, the more I prefer the company of dogs.

    ricey

  2. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Villain & Flirtt View Post
    Google 'Calgary Model'. As in Calgary, Canada.

    I'll admit it is not perfect- but it is many times more effective than BSL and some of the outcomes are extremely positive.

    In a nutshell, it is about taking seriously and enforcing laws around dog ownership and community education. Calgary has no BSL and consistently lower numbers of attacks/bites/homicides than places with BSL.
    i'm sorry but peter70 has been on this forum for nearly two years longer than me and he constantly trolls the BSL type threads .. and yet somehow he's never heard calgary mentioned? gimme a break!

  3. #13

    Default

    I've stated previously that i believe the best way to fix the problem is through licensing owners and ensuring that dogs are trained properly(i.e either compulsory training attendance or a test that you put your dog through at a certain age to prove that it is trained to a certain level - also putting dogs through a temperament test would be a great option). Outlawing non ANKC breeding would also be a great step for many reasons including attacks(although i'm not sure quite how you get around people who use certain crossbreeds for legitimate working dogs).

    That combined with the Calgary approach of enforcing existing laws would IMO be close to the best and most successfull legislation possible

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Gippsland, Victoria
    Posts
    743

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mymatejack View Post
    i'm sorry but peter70 has been on this forum for nearly two years longer than me and he constantly trolls the BSL type threads .. and yet somehow he's never heard calgary mentioned? gimme a break!
    Lol, MMJ *wink*

    Thing is, I will happily answer the same 'what else works' question every single time because it is one more opportunity to add to the 'Google-able' world, therefore making alternative easily accessible for anyone maybe even possibly thinking there might be something to it.

    Thunderous applause is simply made up of many single hands clapping.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    4,290

    Default

    I just re-read that article.

    "It highlights to most that dog control laws that have not been changed for more than 35 years are clearly out of date and out of step with current community expectations," Mayor Pickard said.

    WTF does that even mean? That the community thought it was acceptable for dogs to maul a child 35 years ago?! Or that they are now more prone to be influenced by sensationalist media who tries to make it appear that there are killer breeds on the loose in our towns.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mymatejack View Post
    Outlawing non ANKC breeding would also be a great step for many reasons including attacks(although i'm not sure quite how you get around people who use certain crossbreeds for legitimate working dogs).
    That is ridiculous. The working dogs have their own registers. My purpose bred sheepdogs are all on the working dog registers and one is working kelpie council bred dog and one from imported scottish working BC lines and neither hav anything to do with ANKC. People who need working dogs have no interest whatsoever in ANKC registered dogs. Many farmers breed their own working dogs suited to the distrct, stock and environment that they work in and are not on any register. A working dog can be accepted onto a working register either by birth or by being rigourously tested for working ability, but many farmers dont bother if they are breeding their own dogs. They may or may not bring in dogs registered with the working BC, kelpie council or asutralian working sheepdog registers.
    Last edited by Kalacreek; 06-10-2012 at 11:09 AM.

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Villain & Flirtt View Post
    Lol, MMJ *wink*

    Thing is, I will happily answer the same 'what else works' question every single time because it is one more opportunity to add to the 'Google-able' world, therefore making alternative easily accessible for anyone maybe even possibly thinking there might be something to it.

    Thunderous applause is simply made up of many single hands clapping.
    Quote Originally Posted by peter70 View Post
    Yes what would work? I certainly read a lot on here about what won't.
    I agree with your sentiment V&F, however peter70 has made his stance on pitbulls very clear(although recently he has been seen to be backing away from his past comments) and hence my questioning of his motives(i wouldn love to think peter70 was actually asking the question to offer google some more pro-pitbull/antibsl posts but i just can't see it)especially given that he has already read many posts offering other solutions ...

    Quote Originally Posted by peter70 View Post
    Lots of people who are anti pitbull are that way. They just dont want to know the other side at all, they ar enot interested

    And you know what Lala most of the pro pitbull people would have you believe pitbulls are warm and fuzzy.
    I myself have no faith or trust in Pitbulls whatsoever and have come to this conclusion as a dog lover and owner of dogs for all of my life. I have said before and i will say it again the number of owners i have met who own them, own them purely as a tough dog, not a warm and fuzzy one.
    I was talking to another driver at work about dogs the other day and he showed me the 9" scar on his arm where it was stitched back together after being bitten by a pitbull. He even said he actually felt sorry for the dog being PTS. He said the dog wasnt trying to attack him but his small dog in his arms that he'd picked up when he seen it coming towards him. It could have been a Labrador, Mastiff whatever........but it wasnt, it was a pitbull. Clearly another irresponsible owner letting thier dog roam you say???, Unfortunately the breed seems to attract these type (and no that is not a dig at the resposible ones however you seem to be a minority).
    I dont know a 100% that i agree with BSL but its not going to really affect me at this stage so why would i come out to defend a breed i dont like or trust?
    ETA : source for peter70's quote : http://www.dogforum.com.au/bsl-dog-l...g-bites-2.html
    Last edited by mymatejack; 06-10-2012 at 08:51 PM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Gippsland, Victoria
    Posts
    743

    Default

    Mmmm, yes, but if you read a little farther;


    Quote Originally Posted by Villain & Flirtt View Post
    Peter70... Following on from your post, I just want to take this opportunity to clarify the objections 'we' are submitting against BSL.

    'We' (our small group of interested parties including NDTF) are not defending pitbulls. Nor do we defend any breed. Whether I/we like a breed or not is utterly irrelevant to our argument. In fact the notion of breed can be dropped completely and what we are arguing still applies.

    We are criticizing a course of action taken which boils down to this- if a dog looks one way, it is dangerous. If it looks any other way, it is safe. IMHO that is a terribly negligent way to deal with a community safety issue and has little chance of increasing community safety. That's it.

    The fact that this by default tends to support pitbulls as a breed is only relevant in that if the breed were, say, a Maltese it would do the same thing irrelevant of whether I like Maltese Terriers or not. The pitbull is nothing more than today's whipping boy, like Dobes, GSD's, Bloodhounds and others before them. The pitbull forms the 'visual ID'. That is the only relevance of breed.

    ETA: you say it won't affect you, so why bother? Well, when the visual ID markers of a 'dangerous breed' include height over 20cm, weight over 10kg don't complain because we need support now, not just when 'your' breed becomes endangered!!!!
    Quote Originally Posted by peter70 View Post
    I understand what your saying and i guess my last comment was a little silly, what do you offer as an alternative?

    Just for the record i dont think there is anything you can do to prevent dog bites but there must actions to REDUCE them.
    So, yes, MMJ, I do agree with you that the question has been asked and answered, BUT I would be hard pressed to state that Peter70 is completely unwilling to consider the wider picture. In comparison to many, Peter70's comments are pretty conservative and have the potential to keep us on our toes in terms of evidence and supporting arguments.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    4,290

    Default

    I agree V&F.

    If we even manage to convince 1 person that BSL is not what the politicians and the media make it out to be, then that is fantastic. They don't have to like pitbulls, they don't have to agree with everything most of us think, but if they see that we have a genuine interest in reducing dog bites - which of course we do, as dog lovers! - and that there are rational arguments as to why BSL is not the solution, that is the best way to start changing public opinion.

    And if that means that we have to repeat ourselves - after all, some of those BSL threads go for pages and pages - it's not such a big deal. That makes it more likely that visitors to this forum will find the info too.

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
  •