Thread: Dog insurance? Pit bulls? No - bulls pit!

Another tax on the law abiding sensible middle England. I already pay a bulked up premium, as do we all that pay, on car insurance to cover the uninsured, Burberry capped, abusers of the roads. To own my legal guns, the chief constable of my local force - an anti-shooting man - insists on security measures which added up to a grand. Now this absurdity, where dangerous dog owners compell all of us who own dogs to toe a minimum line; because nanny knows best.

Well Go-go (if you don't watch Jo Frost you won't get that allusion) nanny knows bugger all. Your firearms legislation has not affected illegal gun ownership. The number of untaxed (boo!) and uninsured drivers seems unaffected and guess what nanna, insurance for dogs - well that won't matter either.

The implication is that dog insurances will be checked - presumably by canine support officers. The middle Englandsrs will have their disks or chips. The akita-toting, pit bull jaw strengtheners will not. moreover they will probably set the beasts on anyone in nylon trousers and a reflective tabard stupid enough to challenge them.

What next? Insurance for possessing a loud wife in a built up area?

Whilst I'm not a dog owner myself, I heard this and agree, the first person to be convicted will be a 73 year old white woman from Sussex, the next day a kid in Croydon/Liverpool will be killed by an unregistered dog that the authorities have been informed about.

Lucky that banning hand guns and drugs has been so effective!

ZANU Labour - tough on crime, tough on the victims of crime!

I'm the happiest owner of an American Staffordshire Terrier.

Some regard this breed as 'dangerous'. Indeed my Berry doesn't like other dogs but as to the human beings then I couldn't even imagine the scale of love that is contained in her well shaped head. All members of our family are the centre of the Universe for her. Sometimes I have a strange feeling that she understands speech and tries to speak herself. Her swift glances from my wife to me are so telling. Also she is very accurate, obeys orders and never shows even a shade of aggresion toward people.

She is regared as a 'dangerous dog'. Well, I'm ready to pay additional taxes. American Staffordshire Terriers is the best breed I ever had.

I bet almost everyone here who owns dogs have already got them insured and chipped the cat is even done!!

Labour dont seem to realise the people they want to target with the dangerous illegal dogs are criminals already...a new law isnt going to make a blind bit of difference

I have 2 GSDs that go walkies for a couple of hours every day, rain, snow or shine,Without them ,some days I would not get out of bed, they are well trained,well socialised with other dogs and obay all commands, I could walk anywhere with them at heel without any problem, in fact the only reason I need to put them on leads is the reaction of other,stupid people, they are also brilliant PTSD theropists, but every day I see the Chav wonkers walking through the city center with trophy dogs, that are untrained, unsocialised, and dangerious, do the government really think that the people who disregard the dangerious dogs act now , will bother to comply with another stupid law,FFS

I must say the only thing my staff has ever managed to intimidate is food.
bit of a failure in the land shark department.
unfortunately the "I WANT AN INTIMIDATING DOG TO GIVE ME STATUS CROWD" won't be bothered by this measure.
The sort of twat who thinks a dog off a lead in town is acceptable.
not sure who you can control the idiots.

99% of people in England could be trusted with a machine gun about 95% would not be interested in owning one most of the rest would be responsible.
its the 1%of crims and nutters who make life difficult for everybody else

Originally Posted by Gracie

I bet almost everyone here who owns dogs have already got them insured and chipped the cat is even done!!

Labour dont seem to realise the people they want to target with the dangerous illegal dogs are criminals already...a new law isnt going to make a blind bit of difference

No, they do realise. They are just too frightened of actually taking direct action against one segment of society who will be only too quick to squeal about anything ending in '-ism', their human rights and will then go on have their state-funded lawyer fight for their right to keep their pschotic and untrained dog in central London.
It's far easier to apply a blanket tax on every dog owner, secure a couple of easy convictions for owners failing to microchip their dogs (like Cuddles said, grannies with 13 yr old labradors etc) and watch the coffers gently fill.

I sincerely wish that we were more like the French in one respect. When they have had enough of their politicians they do something about it. A couple of heads on Traitors Gate "pour encourager les autres" should do the trick.

Having just listened on R4 to two "Souldjas" in London talking about their reasons for owning pitbull /staff crossbreeds, it sent a shiver down my spine. Apart from the fact that Jamal and Arif were barely coherent, their reason for ownership seemed to be that the dog made them look hard, innit.

I can't think of any other reason for wanting to own one of these naturally aggressive animals. The ex plod on after them explained far better than I could the fallacy of owning a dangerous dog. The standard line of "my dog's a softy and wouldn't hurt a fly" really doesn't apply.

Personally I'm not a dog lover although I can see the attraction of owning a dog. But these fcukwits keeping dogs as weapons / ego boosters will result in further unwieldy and ineffective dangerous dog laws being enacted. The media and pressure groups will see to that.

In Germany third party dog insurance and registration is the norm - no problem with that as it seems to work in practice.

The trouble with UK is people do not obey laws.

The people who are using Fido as a "weapon", or for any other nefarious purpose are not going to obey future laws any more than current laws.
The ability to avoid complying with the law is there, the ability to detect wrongdoers and enforce the law is not.

Pointless.

The problem is not the dogs, its the fact that the owners are some of the pathetic people in this country, who come from the sink hole esstates, have little or no education,no job,no prospects, and are second or third generation benifit scroungers. Near where I live there are men my age who have never had a job and have never really left the esstate, dog ownership is the high point of their lives, poseing with their dog outside the pub/ bookies is their only social activity, as they know no better. They tend to treat their dogs better than their children who are left to run wild and get stoned outside the local chippy, until they are old enough to join the adults at the pub/ bookies with their trophy dog, it's a never ending story

For anyone else who's confused, here's a link: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7054651.ece

Here's the part that really scares me:

According to the report from Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, and Hilary Benn, the Environment Secretary, police or council wardens would have powers to issue these orders, similar to fixed-penalty notices.

Fixed penalty notices are a disgusting abuse of our legal system.

Effectively, a council employee decides that you're guilty - with no requirement to provide any sort of evidence - and then acts as judge, jury and executioner in issuing you with a punishment. If innocent, the onus is on you to try and prove that you didn't do it.

The idea of 'innocent until proven guilty' is something our country was built on.

It's only a matter of time before new dog owners are required to register with the Police and undergo a CRB check. Perhaps pass a 'dog handling' test as well.

Labour know that this won't have any effect on responsible dog owners. It's about tax and control.

What concerns me is Johnsons intention to broaden the list of "dangerous" dogs - where would that leave everybody with what naive people already think are dangerous – Rotties, Alsatians, Dobermans etc????

Originally Posted by Alsacien

In Germany third party dog insurance and registration is the norm - no problem with that as it seems to work in practice.

The trouble with UK is people do not obey laws.

The people who are using Fido as a "weapon", or for any other nefarious purpose are not going to obey future laws any more than current laws.
The ability to avoid complying with the law is there, the ability to detect wrongdoers and enforce the law is not.

Pointless.

I agree, it is totally pointless.

When living in Germany, I of course had third party insurance for my dog and he was registered, which is why I paid an annual tax for him (Hundesteuer). I've just checked and for that area (Blomberg-Cappel), it's now a whopping 36 euros per year.

Originally Posted by mistersoft

Originally Posted by Alsacien

In Germany third party dog insurance and registration is the norm - no problem with that as it seems to work in practice.

The trouble with UK is people do not obey laws.

The people who are using Fido as a "weapon", or for any other nefarious purpose are not going to obey future laws any more than current laws.
The ability to avoid complying with the law is there, the ability to detect wrongdoers and enforce the law is not.

Pointless.

I agree, it is totally pointless.

When living in Germany, I of course had third party insurance for my dog and he was registered, which is why I paid an annual tax for him (Hundesteuer). I've just checked and for that area (Blomberg-Cappel), it's now a whopping 36 euros per year.

Years ago I asked in Germany where my dog tax went, to be met by shocked expressions and vacant eyes. I told them I was serious (was having an anti-German day), and a week later I got a letter detailing locations of poop bag dispensers in parks and metal rings fitted to walls outside supermarkets etc in the last year.......