Police describe the dog as a white and black staff with a collar and a white belly.
PC Russell Cherrington-Cook, in charge of the investigation, said: "From our initial investigation, it appears that the owner of the dog did not make attempts to help the children and showed a complete disregard for what happened by walking on whilst the attack took place."Gosh. From the description I'd never have thought that might be the reaction...
A 'dog tax', nominally £1,000 per annum, will go a long way towards keeping our streets clean and safe.
ReplyDeleteWhat makes me smack my head on the table is that there are always, always a number of commenters who think the story is about the dog.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I can confirm that there is a terrible blindness in many dog owners about the behaviour of the dog being their responsibility at all times. This is not special to the lardy vest-wearer in the story. I've known little old ladies who can't keep their pet Fifi poodle under control, others who are too embarrassed to stop their dachshund from trying to hump the legs of visitors, labrador owners who let their dogs sit in cycle lanes and, a year or two ago, a springer spaniel I saw nearly had a jogger off the path and in to a fast-flowing marine estuary, by running up behind her and pushing her over. The owners just went 'Sorreee....she's only playing' while we picked up the bewildered woman who thought she was being attacked. Which she was, in a way.
I have seen a very good audi pull up, let the boxerish dog out, take a crap, and make not attempt to clear it up.
I do not share MTG's optimism about taxation. Many of these numpties have already paid hundreds, if not thousands, for the dog and its care. That is almost part of the problem - they somehow think they have paid, so they can do as they like and it must be the dog's 'uman rights, innit?
Having spent a large part of the 90's cleaning dog shit out of a child's wheelchair wheels I would say a £500 annual licence fee UNLESS the dog was DNA tagged and on a data base. Street cleaners, dog wardens and most particularly plastic-cops would be required to take a sample of every dropping and the offending owner, if his dog was on the data base, fined £1000. 3 fines in short succession would mean the owner would be banned from keeping animals for 5 years and the dog destroyed.
ReplyDeleteXX DNA tagged and on a data base. Street cleaners, dog wardens and most particularly plastic-cops would be required to take a sample of every dropping and the offending owner, if his dog was on the data base, XX
ReplyDeleteDNA can not be retrieved from shit.
So you're on a looser RIGHT away laddie.
XX Woman on a Raft said...
ReplyDeleteI do not share MTG's optimism about taxation. Many of these numpties have already paid hundreds, if not thousands, for the dog and its care. XX
As a "one off." Make the bastards pay that every six months, then....
"DNA can not be retrieved from shit."
ReplyDeleteThanks...the things I learn on the interweb never cease to amaze me. Scrub that idea then ....looks like we will have to go with the computer controlled aerial armed drones to take out offending dogs.
Eat lead Benton!
@ BD
ReplyDelete"...UNLESS the dog was DNA tagged and on a database.." "Scrub that idea then..."
Your original proposal was technically 'Spot' on. Moreover, the established procedures for typing DNA from dog and human waste, are identical.
"A 'dog tax', nominally £1,000 per annum, will go a long way towards keeping our streets clean and safe."
ReplyDeleteYes, the elderly lady at the end of my road, with the immaculately mannered Cavalier spaniel can afford that, I'm sure...
"The owners just went 'Sorreee....she's only playing' while we picked up the bewildered woman..."
A pet hate are the ones who are engrossed in their smartphone while Fido runs around the park like a lunatic. Probably because it's starved of attention.
Why can't these selfish people get a virtual pet?