I’d like to add that I do think breeds should be graded somehow, like firearms based….but based on recorded attacks.

With

Say Class 5, being a German Shepard where you would need to prove your need for having the dog and pass certain licensing regulation.

Class 4: Dogs in between class 3 and 5.

Class 3: dogs such a Springer Spaniels. Sometimes (rarely) known to be a bit aggressive but often make good family pets, muzzling and legal status of the dog would be based on a sociability test carried out by a veterinary nurse. It would be important that the test was not done at a vets as this would spook some dogs. It would have to be cheap as well and easy to pass the paperwork.

Class 2: something something something….you get my drift.

Class 1: Pugs, King Charles Spaniels or dogs that have never been recorded as causing any serious injuries.

Your world sounds awfully dangerous and risky snips, where is it?

though as for dogs playing ‘fetch’, i guess that its unrestrained dogs behaving in this manner that are the bane of most cyclists…one mans pleasure can be anothers ‘negative externality’.

Touche, a lot of cyclists are the bane of walkers and dogs. I’ve seen a child hit by a cyclist round Rutland Water. Mandatory 5mph limit, licensing and insurance for cyclists please. I’ve met more cyclists who are total and utter twunts with a lack of respect for the safety of others than I have dog walkers.

You get my drift? Deal with the fact that other people want to use and need space for their activities as well and that if you encourage the banning of their activity you will soon see your own being banned as well for much the same reasons. Basically, get some tolerance.

Chap in my town had two dogs on the banned list, live ammunition, quantity of coke, 30 cannabis plants plus all the growing equipment and they gave him bail. FFS.

These ‘tougher dog laws’ mean nowt!