Where the foxes caper unmolested, the government packs your school lunch, and “there are always people who will buy a dog from their mate in a pub and won’t tell the authorities.”
Every dog owner will have to take a costly ‘competence test’ to prove they can handle their pets, under new Government proposals designed to curb dangerous dogs.
Owners of all breeds would also have to buy third-party insurance in case their pet attacked someone, and pay for the insertion of a microchip in their animal recording their name and address.
The proposals are among a range of measures to overhaul dog laws in England and Wales being considered by senior Ministers, who are expected to announce a public consultation within weeks.
Somewhat surprisingly, owning a pitchfork remains legal – a fact that reflects more upon the British people than it does the Labour Party.
(h/t Peter)
Update: A glimmer of hope? Though, I think they’d make more headway with a Brighton Tar ‘N Feather Party.
So they insert the microchip in the owner…
That is why Jefferson said, “the government that governs least, governs best”.
It’s unfortunate that we have too many incompetent lawyers sitting in the House of Commons and provincial legislatures with too much time on their hands and dreams of ‘make-work’ projects for when they get booted out.
This is just another example and it’s only a matter of time before some dipper or lieberal over here picks up on it.
Oh wait, didn’t McGuinty already put something similar through in Ontario? I believe it was the ‘pitbull ban’. Soon they’ll move to ban noisy Chihouhas.
Tony Blair?
“Tony Blair?”
I believe Kate is referring to his legacy.
What’s next, a competency test for handling children?
Substitute “dog” with a certain broad strata of society and I’m good with the regulations.
Sounds just like Canada. You can never have too much government in your life. No doubt this started when someone asked their MP to protect them from the Queen’s Yorkies.
Nuke England.
It’s always the same B.S. Some low life drug dealer or bum has dogs that are dangerous, and the rest of society has to pay the cost. Do they really think that the average person needs regulations like this to control bad dogs? I am sure that low life’s who have dangerous dogs will be rushing into the nearest gov’t office to take the tests required to how a dog….
I got a suggestion for dangerous dogs….shoot on sight…..
Gordon Brown’s England is just like Tony Blair’s but where the nanny is a bully.
What they need is a “competency test” for politicians to ensure they can take care of their “pets” without having to shout.
Oh, and its long past time when we each had our own chips inserted.
I’ll bet it was written by the Animal Rights bunch. Another expensive barrier to dog ownership, as one more step towards eliminating ‘pets’ in England.
Kathy Shaidle, our very own Curtis E. Lemay.
Since our bombs have “eyes”, could the bombing be a little more selective than England? I mean, they still make good beer.
England is being nibbled to death by ducks. And the people love it!
If only people were allowed to deal with threats, on their own, the problem of dangerous dogs would disappear.
It’s either/or, in my opinion. Either the authorities keep dogs from attacking my family, or I should have the absolute right to deal with a dangerous dog, in my own way.
Merry ole England is a socialists’ hell hole, bloody hell bankrupted morally and financially and what is NuLabour concerned with well dah how you walk your dog. Jesus wept, Ontario that’s your future under the demented Liberal/socialists.
glasnost@10.23
when the liberals of Canada were in committees discussing their planned Canadian National Daycare Plan, a liberal senator had referred to parents as being “mere minders” ie: “not professional child raisers”
so yeah, your “what’s next” may be as distant as the next Liberal majority. (that’s the first time in my life I’ve said “next Liberal majority” together in one sentence).
Socialists correctly determined that the trigger words for the average British voter are INCREASE, MORE, LARGE and BIGGER. It doesn’t matter if politicians are talking about an increase in useless laws, more unskilled immigrants, large deficits and bigger holes in swiss cheese. Nowhere is the old adage ‘you get what you vote for’ more evident than the UK.
It’s always the same B.S. Some low life drug dealer or bum has dogs that are dangerous, and the rest of society has to pay the cost.
~Mike L.
It’s called collective punishment.
They’re applying it to an identifiable group of people too.
Imagine if they applied it to Muslims.
grok is correct.
The government doesn’t want us to have dogs.
There are more restrictive new laws almost yearly and they are always hiring more special officers to harass dog owners.
Microchip implants and cancer.
http://tinyurl.com/3a3tvp
Several years back we had a neighbor (for a short while) behind us who when he first moved in,had a big unfriendly pit-bull that used to come into our yard and confront us if we were out there. My daughter plays out in our yard. I called animal control and asked if I was within my rights to shoot the dog. I was told if it attacks, anywhere, yes. If it’s on my property, anytime, yes.
I told them thank you, that’s all I need to know. I told our new neighbor. The pit bull was hardly ever seen again, and the renter left soon thereafter. But then, this is Alaska.
dp
“””If only people were allowed to deal with threats, on their own, the problem of dangerous dogs would disappear. “””
you mean like shoot the owner of aggressive dogs???
Yes, TimP, that used to be the way it was in the rest of the continent. The saving grace of Alaska is that it has an environment and climate that is too bleeding harsh for the likes of bleeding heart liberals to become established there.
Depends on how you define ‘dog’.
GYM- No, I mean shoot, bludgeon, poison or whatever, the aggressive dog. Not everyone who owns a dangerous dog is aware they’re even dangerous. Being stupid should not be reason enough for being shot.
I hope everyone realizes that dogs get done away with, all the time, without the owner ever suspecting foul play. Next time you see a reward poster, for a missing pet, you should assume that pet pissed someone off.
TimP- Alaska sounds a lot like a time capsule from much better times. I’m going to come for a visit, real soon.
Having lived in England with scumbags for neighbours. I should add scumbags with two rottweillers for neighbours. I see why they are proposing this. However it is typical of the socialist control freaks. Our next door neighbours were living on benefits. They had two large dogs, satellite tv, jetskis, drove a big 4×4 and went on holiday once or twice a year. Their rent was paid for by the state.
In the five years we were subjected to them they never did a days work apart from fiddling cash on the side. Yet there was nothing physically worng with these parasites. It is the system now in Britain. Sixty plus years of welfare and generations of people believing it is their entitlement has led to a society where it is deemed acceptable to sit on your arse and collect the dole.
These people should not have the wherewithal to feed two large dogs and run a big SUV etc. they should be on the breadline or forced to take jobs.
When Bliar came to power he tasked Frank Field with thinking “the unthinkable” Frank came back and told him they need to cut welfare to the bone. Comrade Brownstainovich the current Prime Mentalist was in charge of the treasury he said no.
So instead they opened the borders and let in hordes of immigrants to do the jobs these welfare deadbeats wouldn’t do. If you want the background Google Andrew Neather report. Now the socialists have pretty much bankrupted the UK and yet 30% of the population will still consider voting for the scoundrels.
Not surprising perhaps though when you have so many people dependent one way or another on the treasury largesse.
So to return to the topic. If you walk down most British streets the one thing you will notice is Burberry clad pond life accompanied invariably with a Staffordshire bull terrier or some other status symbol dog. They could of course cut welfare and then most of these dogs would end up being destroyed or re homed, but that is too painful for the socialists. Also by introducing more laws it gives even more public sector jobsworths a reason to exist. The welfare deadbeats will probably have the cost of the microchips paid for by the state and the only people to suffer are the usual suspects the ever diminishing working class.
When I lived in Germany, my ‘canine liability’ was covered as part of my house insurance, so that part isn’t new in Eurotopia. I note that the British police aren’t supposed to take police dogs into Muslim homes in deference to ‘religious sensitivity’ so I do have to wonder if there is a religious overtone to this proposal like all too many proposals in England. Mind you, I have often said that owners should be licenced and not dogs; I’ve been in canine rescue (ie., ‘rehoming’) for long enough to meet some really despicable people and most of their dogs were salvageable.
You know the next step, don’t you? Wives will be having their hubbies ‘chipped’…cut down on the straying.
Funny about some people….
I usually have my “committee” along when I drive to town.
If someone approaches the car they are chewing on the glass….
Some genius have summoned the police about dangerous dogs….who take their time attending and…….bring dog biscuits.
One constable says he makes it SOP to check the complainant’s ID. He says it frequently yields expired driving licences and outstanding warrents/tickets……lapsed insurance–expired plates…..
HEE HEE
So… a competency test to prove you can handle your pet; yet any idiot can have a child (mind you, a GPS chip isn’t a bad idea for teenagers). 😛
They’re RFID chips, Russtovich.
Competency tests to allow owners to own a dog amount to licensing the owner, whereas right now it’s only the dogs that are licensed.
If dog owners become licenced then it is only a matter of pulling the licence or grandfathering licences in whole areas while issuing no more licences and the state can licence dog ownership out of existence.
Considering the growing number of Muslims in Britain, their attitude toward dogs, and their political impact on British culture, this will allow areas of England under Muslim majority control to eliminate dog ownership at the civic level.
See what a national day-care system gets you? Sharia law and blind obedience schools for pet owners.
We should take advantage of this. If we opened up our immigration gates to Britain right now, we’d probably attract the type we want: members of the Paratroop Regiment, SAS, and the Royal Marines.
The worst part is, this doesn’t even surprise me in the least. I’ll be really glad though if Labor is reelected. Britain needs to undergo a ‘system crash’ and Cameron is a complete loser. He’s good for nothing.
And these idiot laws have nothing to do with immigration. The people who impose this crap are white English natives, just like Gordon Brown. Britain needs more immigration to save Britain from the British.
That certainly is a good looking border collie on the frount page of this article. The beautiful, lithe, Border Collie is the most ambitious loyal dog
on the face of the earth, IMO. I have known many border collies in my life and the great sense of purpose, class and intelligence that these dogs impart should be emulated by poor old England’s political class. Those political fools and their camp followers (msm) should be mandated to spending 24 hours keeping up with a border collie and his herd of sheep – they would die or learn a few things about how to maintain order and peace.
Doggy licences for humans?
Ok that’s it! Who kidnapped Britain and who is this soviet imposter taking its place? Give the UK back right now or we’ll deport all your licenced doggies to proper homes.
“You know the next step, don’t you? Wives will be having their hubbies ‘chipped’…cut down on the straying.
Posted by: DaninVan at February 28, 2010 1:34 PM”
Them woodchippers DID come in handy in Fargo.
Of course this is the same country that licenses televisions.
Just more evidence that everyone with a brain left England already.
Actually, there are still people in Great Britain with backbone. Take a look how Nigel Farage attacks the president of the EU, Herman van Rompuy just recently in this clip at YOUtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFRFA4wlVj8
What was the statistic I heard the other day? — Labour has brought in 1200 new laws since coming to power?
Once they get all the regs to oppress dog owners aka “caregivers for fur people” in place perhaps they might spend a little time elsewhere:
http://centurean2.wordpress.com/2009/06/05/birmigham-uk-child-starved-to-death-by-muslim-mother-and-step-father-held-captive-for-months/
The only Brits I come in contact with, are soldiers. Most of them are about the same as Brits have always been. They just seem to go with the flow.
I mean, really, they’ve been ruled by monarchs for centuries. They’ve had kings, who created new laws, just to get rid of a wife, or steal someone else’s. They’ve been taxed, on threat of death, by rulers who lived in castles. They lived in serfdom, while the upper class lived in the most incredible luxury on earth.
Brits don’t view these new laws as anything more than another inconvenience.
Great Britain, cradle of democracy and once the greatest nation on earth is finished. I predict collapse, semi-anarchy and the rise of a “man on horseback” who will make the current level of petty oppression “the good old days”.
In the immortal words of William Wordsworth, “Milton! Thou shouldst be living at this hour. England has need of thee. She has become a stinking shithole’. (Or something like that)
dp – Britain invented parliamentary democracy. There hasn’t been serfdom there in over 600 years. The Magna Carta (it’s important) was signed in 1215. Charles I was the last guy who tried pretending to be an absolute monarch, and he got his head chopped off. You seem to be describing some place like Somalia, or Russia under Ivan the Terrible, or Chicago.
Now Britain is a dreadful, scary place, and none of us must ever go there; but that sad situation is a relatively new development.
Detroit, maybe.
There’s one very simple solution to the problem and that’s concealed carry. I don’t care what types of dogs people own as long as they realize that if their dogs get loose and attack someone, or their livestock, the dog is dead. The only people that I think need competency tests in dog handling are the idiots who chain their dog up in the yard for the whole day and wonder why the neighbors complain about the barking.
What I find curious is that I’ve never been attacked by a large dog and the only dog that I’ve had to kick away from me was a small poodle that decided it was going to chew on my leg. I’ve known a lot of dobermans, German sheppards and a few pit bulls but all have been quite good natured around me.
chutzpahticular at February 28, 2010 5:26 PM
Wasn’t that a chipper that Elin used on Tiger?
Glad that’s happening there and not here. If there were a test, I would fail. Got a long-haired Chihuahua pup to go with my rescue mutt. It’s already taken over the main floor. Thank goodness it’s too small to navigate stairs or there’d be no where to hide.
“Tony Blair?”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I believe Kate is referring to his legacy.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Ah. With thanks.