yes, toxocanis persists for up to 10 years

Have you told the strays?

Fascinating. It’s like watching the slowest, most boring car crash in the world over and over again.

or 2 bald men fighting over a comb?

Have you told the strays?

do you live in eastern europe? not seen a dog without an owner for years around here

Cougar – I have pointed to the law and I thought if the kennel club – that rabidly anti dog organisation – guidance on the law said something then this might be accepted.

they can hardly be accused of an anti dog bias can they 🙂

TJ,
I think it would be more accepted if it didn’t backlash everything you were trying to say…

do you live in eastern europe? not seen a dog without an owner for years around here

Eastern? Having a laugh aren’t you?
10 years in Spain, do keep up…
Are you equally vociferous about cat crap? Which I do believe exist in the UK and do have a nasty habit of carrying toxoplasmosis (not nice).

Are you equally vociferous about cat crap?

yup, personally I think that there should be a program to remove feral cats from the environment and to limit owned cats being sent out to depopulate the small birds and mammals in locale 🙂

the reduction in the UK’s carbon footprint and benefits to a number of vulnerable species will be invaluable

you’re demolishing your general credibility her

😆

TJ the simple fact is livestock are better protected than you under law. Whilst i agree that morally dogs shouldnt annoy you legally you have to be reasonably fearful of injury before you can resort to the legal process. Now can you either find the legal wording or give up please.

AA – its been explained many times. Its a civil wrong under common law not to have your dog under control. Many different bits of law both statute and case cover it. It varies if you are on open land or on a right of way, in England and is Scotland, on land covered by access rights

You are liable for any damage your dog causes if it it not under control. that is your legal obligation and there is many bits of guidance as to what is considered “under control” and “under close control” This is general and additional to specific legislation which place requirements on dog owners

You like others on here are confusing the criminal offence of dog dangerously out of control with the civil wrong of failing to keep your dog under control.

TJ what is a cival wrong under common law i have no idea. Can you give me some specific laws or examples please? I talking public places not farmland and we are talking about being out of control not causing damage.
Keep wriggling!

Does any of the civil legislation define ‘out of control’ (like the DDA defines ‘dangerously out of control’)?

I don’t like this thread any more!!
Somebody call my lawyer….

AA – I have done thru this thread – you just don’t want to accept it

teh great ape
Its defined by case law and there are accepted definitions which I have posted before.

Enough

Some dog owners make me very, well, astonished really.

One day I was in the park with my dog Sam (dead now, of cancer). He was an exceptionally big lurcher. He was standing next to me, quietly, we were watching some birds on the lake.

A medium sized dog came running towards us, its woman owner puffing and panting along behind it, shouting its name. Medium sized dog totally ignored owner and kept running toward Sam and I, barking and snarling. Woman running and shouting, dog ignoring and advancing on us.

The dog arrived at us. Started dancing round Sam barking and snarling. Sam let out two almighty barks. Woman finally arrives, still cannot capture her dog, shouts at me “YOU SHOULD KEEP YOUR DOG UNDER CONTROL!”.

Mental.

It happens a lot with small dogs. My dog is under control (because if it wasn’t all hell would break loose – see above – probably the very end of Middle England lol), but small dogs are very often aggressive, they run up to me and my dog barking, snapping and snarling.

The owner invariably find this funny.

I often wonder how funny they would think it was if my dog bit their horrible disobedient f**cking yappy little b8st8rd thing.

😀

😀

I often wonder how funny they would think it was if my dog bit their horrible disobedient f**cking yappy little b8st8rd thing.

And a Merry Christmas to you to.

Not answering questions not only loses any credibility in this thread TJ, but also in others where you seem to think that simply repeating a question gives you a win.
This, like all legal questions, does not have a clear argument or answer. We have Judges who listen to the most convincing argument and make a decision baswed on the legal framework. The guidelines you provided earlier are just that, guidelines and not law. The law you provide is ambiguous and provokes debate, as it should. But, to blindly go round in circles repeating yourself is not a good strategy.
I think the answer to my previous questions about what the police or courts would do if faced with the legal challenging dilemma of the crotch sniffing dog as a test case, both you and I know the answer is nothing.
Unless you can bring a case of a member of the public who didn’t like dogs, not one that had a phobia, who successfully won a legal case against a crotch sniffing dog, then step away and admit that this is an argument that you will never win.
Equally the rolling of eyes and questioning people’s ability to read is not a good strategy either.
Good luck and I hope that both you and Wikipedia can do something positive and change the world.

😆 Solstice Greetings, merry meet

Don – I have answered the questions repeatedly hence the rolling of eyes.

Your example -Its common law – duty of care applies if none of the various specific provisions that apply in certain areas and conditions applied. Damages would be token only tho.

Dogs Act 1871 Section 2:

This is a civil (not criminal) complaint-although heard at a Magistrates’ Court, it therefore operates on a lower standard of proof – on a balance of probabilities It is important to note that the Act can be applied to both public and private places.

Civil proceedings, commenced by way of complaint, can be taken by the police, local authority or individual members of the public.

A complaint can be made to the Magistrates’ Court that a dog is dangerous, and not kept under proper control. It is the dog’s owner who is proceeded against (as opposed to someone in charge of the dog at the time).

Is that the civil one you mean? (It’s from the endangereddogs.com site you linked to earlier)

Humour me and link back to the specific answers, please? Because I’m buggered if I can see them.

AA – I have done thru this thread – you just don’t want to accept it

I still dont see it.

Livestock ….. check
Wildlife ….. check
Dangerously out of control…… check
Causing damage ….. check
Raiding picnics, sniffing…. nope

“Tis the season to be jolly,
Tra la la la la, la la la laaa”

Come on everyone, this one has passed its best before date. We’re all in general agreement and now just arguing about petty and inane points. There’s enough of this drivel already on STW.

What are you all getting for Christmas?? 😀

Karinofnine… was out walking today and some bloody snappy, growling collie decided to chase my Lurcher, she thought it was funny. You do have to wonder if she’d have thought that if Kea decided to stop bite back. People are **** idiots, most of them should be kept on leads and certainly not allowed to own dogs.

14 **** pages ……….. and TJ still doesn’t get that having the last word doesn’t mean you are right.

Why don’t we just accept he is narcissistic megalomaniac with delusions of grandeur and let this thread die!

let this thread die!

Silver bullet?
Stake through the heart?
Cut the cables at a certain someone’s telephone exchange?

This might work

But I wouldn’t bet on it

In other news, check this out disposable camera tazer project: http://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-build-a-Taser-for-free-1/?ALLSTEPS

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inFq2otNBUE&feature=related[/video]

Can you see what I’ve done there? Please stop now! Direct your energies towards something useful like world peace. On second thoughts, don’t, you’ll have pacifists ripping each others throats out.

i think the problem is that most folks don’t see that a dog sniffing someone is one which is not under control.

On another note, if I used this on TJ would that be assault? 😉

http://www.ladyada.net/make/bedazzler/index.html

i think the problem is that most folks don’t see that a dog sniffing someone is one which is not under control.

I don’t think anybody has said that have they Charlie? It would have been discussed by now.

I don’t think anybody has said that have they Charlie? It would have been discussed by now.

No one in there right mind you consider a sniffing dog to be out of control, so it I doubt anyone with half a brain would be stupid enough to say that.

Dont they eat dogs somewhere, that may sort the problem out.

Careful …. that sounds racist

I did say we’d get to 14 pages didn’t I…. 😀

Dont they eat dogs somewhere, that may sort the problem out.

Yep, Lancashire

Tiger6791 – Member

Dont they eat dogs somewhere, that may sort the problem out.

Yep, Lancashire

yep none roaming around near the Hollands factory 😉

Good effort TJ, but let these people go back to their lives now, OK?

If only he was trolling ….. as I don’t think he is, that’s actually his real opinion; as crazy as that sounds

Is that it?