oh please please please, please have a rich guy's dog bite the heck outta me, I really need the money. sorry David but rich ppl stay rich by not being stupid. getting back on subject, I still think this a containment issue

Dennis, it's *totallY* a containment issue - but irresponsible folks don't contain their dogs, so we're back to step one again...

 Quote:

That would not take care of the "My little Precious wouldn't hurt anybody" people like my nieghbor and her terrier/shepherd mix

*snicker* you could be referring to my neighbors 17 yr old son, but for the last part of the sentence......Sorry, back on point, so assuming the dog is registered and can be tracked, then non-containment violations could be stored, after so many violations a confiscation may be in order....just a suggestion.

you will never be able to stop unresponsible people from owning dogs...that would be like convicts not owning a gun just isnt going to happen..

all the guidelines were good laws..

but then again they are just laws and only as good as the people that enforce them

one that i didnt see in that list was NOT letting the owners own anymore dogs after being convicted of having a dangerous dog that attacked.

what i was getting at was that people put people into categories...rich,poor,fat,skinny,etc...and its hard to just say that its this group or that group in my opinion

alot of it is containment...but also alot of it has to do with the location of the dog...example inner city...no backyards for dog to run, no place to bring dogs to let it run, millions of people ready to sue,
the burbs or middle size towns....bigger backyards, place to bring dogs, and less people to sue
small town usa...even bigger backyards, dont need a place to bring a dog too, and most if not all are friends or relatives that wouldnt think of sueing you
and then there are the farms.....well..dont know were my backyard begins or ends, no people around to sue you, i know i bought a dog but havent seen it in weeks.

sort of off-topic, but what if a dog were to attack someone in defence of themselves or their owner? Would the dog be destroyed and the owner charged? And how would you prove the person was actualy being agressive?

I know a protective dog may attack someone for a situation that the dog believed to be threatening (an overentheusiastic hug from someone the dog didn't know?) do they take instincts into account when charging someone?

we've a number of threads on this but in general no, if someone means you harm on your property and Rinty steps in, it would be no different if you brained the perp with a frying pan. If your pupper is going off due to casual contact then you have some training or behaviour issues to deal with.