Measures to crackdown on dog attacks are welcomed in Bradford (From Bradford Telegraph and Argus)

Micro chips will not stop a dog biting or attacking anyone.

It's all about how the animal is kept, whether on a lead or muzzle.

This microchip nonsense is nothing but non sense.

I repeat chips or microchips DO NOT STOP ANIMALS ATTACKING HUMANS.

I hope this falls flat.

Ps is this the same Elizabeth Hellmich who writes for Heaton in the Telegraph?

I repeat MICROCHIPS DO NOT STOP ANIMALS ATTACKING.

YOUR PROPOSALS ARE KNEE JERK REACTIONS AND POORLY THOUGHT.

You hoping to tag foxes tomorrow!

"The Government unveiled a crackdown yesterday that would see dog owners face a £500 fine if they refuse to microchip their animal." What then? Does the dog get taken away from them? This also assumes that the dog owner will update their details as and when necessary.
"Meanwhile, a loophole will be closed that allowed dog owners whose animals attack people on private property to escape prosecution." This is certainly long overdue.

Next microchip the humans or face jail time...has a scary nasty world war 2 feel about this!

Collected 1000 signatures in a city of many hundreds of thousands! This is a joke and is the future.

how are they going to police it ?its not going to stop dog attacks i was witness to a dog attack a few weeks ago , the dog was initially taken away but returned to the owner ,1. i would not have given the dog back ( owner clueless) and secondly they should have only got it back if they agreed to keep it muzzled in public places which so far i havent seen ,so they either havent paid any attention to any conditions that were attached with the dog being returned , or the dog was just returned without any conditions attached , which if that is the case then its stupid, if it had attacked me i would have wanted the owner to be prosecuted. it was out of control in a public place which i thought was now an offence but obviously not,

granty04 wrote:
how are they going to police it ?its not going to stop dog attacks i was witness to a dog attack a few weeks ago , the dog was initially taken away but returned to the owner ,1. i would not have given the dog back ( owner clueless) and secondly they should have only got it back if they agreed to keep it muzzled in public places which so far i havent seen ,so they either havent paid any attention to any conditions that were attached with the dog being returned , or the dog was just returned without any conditions attached , which if that is the case then its stupid, if it had attacked me i would have wanted the owner to be prosecuted. it was out of control in a public place which i thought was now an offence but obviously not,

It's like blaming the kitchen knife for stabbing someone. The entire concept of this stinks.

The owners of dogs are generally responsible but lately too many young people with gold teeth and chains along with a ferocious looking dog are often seen roaming in gangs of other similar loutish people trying to look tough and cool with this dog aka lethal weapon. Most of these are often seen involved with other crimes...experienced eyes can tell!

Rememebr a dog is a mans best fiend. The man is not necessarily the dogs best friend!

Not so simple wrote:

granty04 wrote:
how are they going to police it ?its not going to stop dog attacks i was witness to a dog attack a few weeks ago , the dog was initially taken away but returned to the owner ,1. i would not have given the dog back ( owner clueless) and secondly they should have only got it back if they agreed to keep it muzzled in public places which so far i havent seen ,so they either havent paid any attention to any conditions that were attached with the dog being returned , or the dog was just returned without any conditions attached , which if that is the case then its stupid, if it had attacked me i would have wanted the owner to be prosecuted. it was out of control in a public place which i thought was now an offence but obviously not,

It's like blaming the kitchen knife for stabbing someone. The entire concept of this stinks.

The owners of dogs are generally responsible but lately too many young people with gold teeth and chains along with a ferocious looking dog are often seen roaming in gangs of other similar loutish people trying to look tough and cool with this dog aka lethal weapon. Most of these are often seen involved with other crimes...experienced eyes can tell!

Rememebr a dog is a mans best fiend. The man is not necessarily the dogs best friend!

did you see the attack too ;) you have more or less described the dog and its owner

I'm sorry but this is most certainly not welcomed in my small part of Bradford. I am a diog owner and have kept German Shepherds for over 20 years now. In all that time none of my dogs has ever bitten anyone. The previous poster has hit the nail squarely on the head with his description of owners who regard their dog as a trophy or lifestyle accessory. Most problems are not caused by bad dogs but by bad owners who fail to train their animals, fail to ensure they cannot escape and roam the streets or fail to adequately control their animals in public.
As for microchipping, I for one will not be having my dogs chipped. They are already identified and registered by an alternative, permanent method and I dont see why I should have to have them chipped as well.

Not so simple wrote:
Next microchip the humans or face jail time...has a scary nasty world war 2 feel about this!

Yes this is where we are headed, this is just a beta test. The mark of the beast RFID chips will be sold as keeping us safe, ie they will start with people with Altzheimers, then children, then they will require you to have one as part of a cashless society with your money being kept on the chip. Break the rules or annoy the wrong people and your chip will be switched off giving you no way of purchasing goods, traveling ect.

So, does this now mean that a burglar breaking into my garage who gets bitten by one of my dogs will be able to sue me for damages?

The implantation of microchips in humans is already wide spread. Some children of the rich and famous have microchips in them which can be tracked in case of kidnappings and the like.

granty04 wrote:

Not so simple wrote:

granty04 wrote:
how are they going to police it ?its not going to stop dog attacks i was witness to a dog attack a few weeks ago , the dog was initially taken away but returned to the owner ,1. i would not have given the dog back ( owner clueless) and secondly they should have only got it back if they agreed to keep it muzzled in public places which so far i havent seen ,so they either havent paid any attention to any conditions that were attached with the dog being returned , or the dog was just returned without any conditions attached , which if that is the case then its stupid, if it had attacked me i would have wanted the owner to be prosecuted. it was out of control in a public place which i thought was now an offence but obviously not,

It's like blaming the kitchen knife for stabbing someone. The entire concept of this stinks.

The owners of dogs are generally responsible but lately too many young people with gold teeth and chains along with a ferocious looking dog are often seen roaming in gangs of other similar loutish people trying to look tough and cool with this dog aka lethal weapon. Most of these are often seen involved with other crimes...experienced eyes can tell!

Rememebr a dog is a mans best fiend. The man is not necessarily the dogs best friend!

did you see the attack too ;) you have more or less described the dog and its owner

The owners should be chipped

Gypsy Wolf wrote:
I'm sorry but this is most certainly not welcomed in my small part of Bradford. I am a diog owner and have kept German Shepherds for over 20 years now. In all that time none of my dogs has ever bitten anyone. The previous poster has hit the nail squarely on the head with his description of owners who regard their dog as a trophy or lifestyle accessory. Most problems are not caused by bad dogs but by bad owners who fail to train their animals, fail to ensure they cannot escape and roam the streets or fail to adequately control their animals in public.
As for microchipping, I for one will not be having my dogs chipped. They are already identified and registered by an alternative, permanent method and I dont see why I should have to have them chipped as well.

Too right

Gypsy Wolf wrote:
So, does this now mean that a burglar breaking into my garage who gets bitten by one of my dogs will be able to sue me for damages?

country gone mad with softy law makers

It's not about how an animal is kept, but the personality of the person and why they have decided to own a known a breed of dangerous dog.

20 years ago probably not a single asian in the Bradford district owned a pitbull or bull terrier type of dog, it was usually racist whites.
Today you now see quiet a few asian with these dogs. The racist whites used these dogs for intimidation and bite people, this is exactly the same reason these asian kids now have them as well.

Owning a pet comes with responsibilities, and if you ask me people should have to get a licence to own one; they should be forced to attend interviews and checks to see why they want one, and what their personality is like, as well as past history and any criminal records!
These chips are a step in the right direction if you ask me.

Not so simple wrote:

granty04 wrote:

Not so simple wrote:

granty04 wrote:
how are they going to police it ?its not going to stop dog attacks i was witness to a dog attack a few weeks ago , the dog was initially taken away but returned to the owner ,1. i would not have given the dog back ( owner clueless) and secondly they should have only got it back if they agreed to keep it muzzled in public places which so far i havent seen ,so they either havent paid any attention to any conditions that were attached with the dog being returned , or the dog was just returned without any conditions attached , which if that is the case then its stupid, if it had attacked me i would have wanted the owner to be prosecuted. it was out of control in a public place which i thought was now an offence but obviously not,

It's like blaming the kitchen knife for stabbing someone. The entire concept of this stinks.

The owners of dogs are generally responsible but lately too many young people with gold teeth and chains along with a ferocious looking dog are often seen roaming in gangs of other similar loutish people trying to look tough and cool with this dog aka lethal weapon. Most of these are often seen involved with other crimes...experienced eyes can tell!

Rememebr a dog is a mans best fiend. The man is not necessarily the dogs best friend!

did you see the attack too ;) you have more or less described the dog and its owner

The owners should be chipped

This is something I have said in the past, with GPS tracking included as well whose location is uploaded live to a secure datacentre.

Obviously the data should only be allowed access to by police via a warrantlike process, but imagine the huge reduction in crime it would bring.

Sure people will say it breaches their rights, but when a crime occurs all the authorities have to do is check which chips were in the vicinity at the time and bring them in for questioning.
Or if someone gets lost in the mountains or avalanche, you can find them easily.
But also remember, technically you are already doing this now yourselves, most smartphones come with gps or gps-like tracking features and noones complaining much about that.

It won't stop biting, but it will encourage more responsibility in the owner.