Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 70

Thread: Dangerous Dog Amnisty Ends

  1. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mymatejack View Post
    My dog is desexed, microchipped and registered. That doesnt mean squat with these new laws. If some council ranger decides my dog is a restricted breed, he will at best be condemned to living in a cage, only walked on lead and muzzled in public. How is that fair for a dog that has spent the last 6 years being an angel, loving his family, loving everyone he comes in contact with.

    Also, if you actually read the new laws, the way they are written, if the council decides your dog is a restricted breed, then ONLY way you can dispute it is by proving your dog in an amstaff. The way i read the law, it doens't matter if your dog is a papered pure bred SBT, any dog that fits the standard and is not proven to be amstaff is automatically an american pitbull. Go back and re-read the legislation with this point in mind!
    A dog that meets the description of a dog in this Part is an American Pit Bull Terrier; except
    a dog in respect of which the owner has one of the following certifi cates stating that the dog
    is an American Staffordshire Terrier –
    a. a pedigree certifi cate from the Australian National Kennel Council;
    b. a pedigree certifi cate from a member body of the Australian National Kennel
    Council;
    c. a pedigree certifi cate from a national breed council registered with the Australian
    National Kennel Council;
    d. a certifi cate signed by a veterinary practitioner stating, or to the effect, that the dog is
    of a particular breed.
    If someone goes to court, the court must updhold the law as its written i believe?

    So the only way for any dog meeting the "standard" that is not able to be proved amstaff is to have a vet certificate stating that it is another breed i.e according to the legislation, SBT pedigree papers DO NOT COUNT.

    Ain't this gonna be interesting!

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,583

    Default

    MMJ

    Ohh I hadn't read it that way. Sheesh. I hate that the only way it can be fixed is to have a dog impounded and a court case.

  3. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    MMJ

    Ohh I hadn't read it that way. Sheesh. I hate that the only way it can be fixed is to have a dog impounded and a court case.
    I'm no lawyer so all my comments are just my interpretation of what i read but ...

    If a papered pure breed staffordshire bull terrier(or any breed other than an amstaff) is deemed to fit the standard of an APBT then that dog can be deemed a restricted breed. I imagine a council worker has some discretion(i.e they'll hopefully recognise ankc registration papers) however if it does go to vcat then i believe that vcat has to uphold whatever is written as law, in which case purebreed papers for any dog other than an amstaff are not worth the paper they're written on. Again, i'm not a lawyer, this is simply my interpretation of what i've read. This point probably deserves its own thread. Anyone wish to comment?

  4. #44

    Default

    Just to highlight the actual wording of the legislation :

    A dog that meets the description of a dog in this Part is an American Pit Bull Terrier; except
    a dog in respect of which the owner has one of the following certifi cates stating that the dog is an American Staffordshire Terrier –


    The only bit of the legislation which provides an out for any dog that is not an amstaff is :

    d. a certifi cate signed by a veterinary practitioner stating, or to the effect, that the dog is
    of a particular breed
    gotta love well thought out legislation hey?

    edit : i'm not actually sure that even the vet cert actually gives an out for any breed other than an amstaff given the preceeding wording.
    Last edited by mymatejack; 10-02-2011 at 09:44 PM.

  5. #45

    Default

    So what will happen if you live in a small town where the vet you go to hasn't all this up to date stuff that can identify a dog of any breeding.
    I feel that no matter what does happen is only going to be bad.
    There will be dogs going to the gallows due to a rangers lack of real knowledge no matter what.

    I would love for them (Council Rangers) go to some sort of seminar to learn the real difference between dogs of different breeds.
    As I know it has been said here that look at the pound listed dogs they get them so wrong and now they are going to be the ones to tell you that your dog is now a dangerous dog.
    Plaese let these people go to something to learn about dog breeds. Even if this means bringing in someone like a Cesar Millan to teach them all.
    This is what I think should go on.
    But even then this is still full of wholes as it then becomes up to the actual individual to make this desission on what it what and I know this is no good.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,583

    Default

    All it takes is for the council ranger (or police officer or other authorised person) to take a dislike to you, and they can lock up your dog and throw away the key. All they need to do is say it meets the standard for pitbull or pitbull cross.

    And the bit about cross breeds of pitbull really gets me. A golden retriever look alike could be a pitbull cross. So why are they even doing a visual id?

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Somewhere between here and there
    Posts
    447

    Default My take on BSLegislation

    It has happened before in Queensland 2002 and the Government had to pay out a huge amount of compensation. DNA testing and results will not be accepted as identification by councils BUT they will be taken into account at a hearing so pretty much IF you have DNA proof (you need to also test the Dam and Sire) you still have to go through a lengthy process of proof. When the BSL was implemented in QLD if you couldn't afford the breed assessment tests then bad luck, in at least one case (A Richards) it was reported that council rangers made people dig up the corpses of dogs to prove the animal pts was in fact a "pitbull" and the grave was not empty.

    Council rangers neither have the skills or any real education (last time I looked it was a 1-2 day course but could have changed). When having to identify a dog they have a distinct lack of training as was proven in Dino Da Fre v Logan City Council where one of the three "experts" Deborah Pomeroy (she helped to devise the 22 point check list). Pomeroy who identified the dog Rusty (of Dino Da Fre) as a "Pitbull" (Rusty was in fact a pure bred Staffordshire bull terrier x Kelpie/cattle dog in appearance stray).

    Pomeroy was self-trained, had no veterinarian qualifications and could claim no scientific basis for the identification system she had helped devise/implement , gee go figure why it was a huge FAIL considering she was one of the 3 "experts" that ordered Rusty be PTS. I know breed judges that have a problem telling mutts/x/mixed breed dogs and vets wont certify a dog unless they are 100% sure that they are x breed for fear of legal ramifications of doing so.

    I use to think our laws were based in Australia on the "innocent until PROVEN guilty" but this is Guilty until PROVEN innocent, even though it is near impossible to prove the breed of a dog that happens to look like a "pitbull" is or is not one.

    Pretty much BSL is a huge fail and it is VERY doubtful that there is any proven effect in the positive from BSL but there is a case for BSL making things worse at least initially with dogs being dumped and left to roam by "owners" wishing to avoid having charges associated with a "dangerous' dog, it can be 1k and upward to comply with the dd laws.

    Well at least now we can walk the streets free of fear from a dangerous dog, unless of course they got it all wrong and the same type of "owners" that put "pitbulls" on the BSL list own other types of dogs. All dogs left to walk free of a dd tag aren't big cuddly puppies but I am sure some people think if there were no dd's then there will be no more serious attacks by dogs.

    I just wish they would assess housing of dogs and ALL OWNERS of ALL dogs yearly maybe even after an initial psychological testing and compulsory set of 12 puppy/obedience training courses to comply with even owning a dog. No more pet shop dogs/cats and no registration for breeders of over x amount of dogs/cats and dogs/cats to be de-sexed. Nahhh that wouldn't help solve the problem would it.

    No doubt that would be a stupid thing for the morally uptight media educated ugly Australian that is baying for the blood of a breed to demand, sorry but they are just as ugly as the idiot owners that destroyed breeds in the first place and got them on the BSL. So lets just keep killing out breeds until we have no more dogs that bite. Band aid solution after band aid after band aid. Maybe we could even put the dogs heads on pikes and have public dog beheading's out front of council offices to appease the paranoid upstanding moral savages calling for deaths of peoples pets.

    BSL sucks butt that's all there is to it IMHO.
    ALL kittens are devil spawn wrapped in cuteness!

  8. #48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mymatejack View Post
    My dog is desexed, microchipped and registered. That doesnt mean squat with these new laws. If some council ranger decides my dog is a restricted breed, he will at best be condemned to living in a cage, only walked on lead and muzzled in public. How is that fair for a dog that has spent the last 6 years being an angel, loving his family, loving everyone he comes in contact with.

    Also, if you actually read the new laws, the way they are written, if the council decides your dog is a restricted breed, then ONLY way you can dispute it is by proving your dog in an amstaff. The way i read the law, it doens't matter if your dog is a papered pure bred SBT, any dog that fits the standard and is not proven to be amstaff is automatically an american pitbull. Go back and re-read the legislation with this point in mind!
    For starters you don't even live in Victoria so nothing is going to happen to your dog so you can stop the Chicken Little act. Why would the coucil have reason to declare your dog? Does it rush/bite people? Is he a problem barker? does he conform to one of the discriptions? Which one? is he an AmStaff/Pitbull/American Bulldog/Yorkie/ Whatevernamethisweek?

  9. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    All it takes is for the council ranger (or police officer or other authorised person) to take a dislike to you, and they can lock up your dog and throw away the key.
    Does this happen to you often?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    All they need to do is say it meets the standard for pitbull or pitbull cross.
    The dog actually has to meet the standard?

  10. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChoppaChop View Post
    Well if a bit of panic keeps dogs safe..... then panic much.

    Seriously now , do you honestly believe a council ranger will leave a dog alone because of 'height' ? Especially if said dog happens to match 3 or 4 of the other points ( something several breed of dog sadly can) ?
    The dog has to fit the description in the legislation.

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
  •