A man has accused a council officer of “aggressive over-enforcement” after he was threatened with a fine for having his dog off the lead while sitting outside a Bristol coffee shop.
He doesn't deny he had the dog off the lead, in contravention of the rules. He just thinks they shouldn't apply to him, because, err, well, it's obvious! Isn't it?
Mr Piper, 36, said: “I am strongly in favour of fines being issued to combat littering, dog fouling, and other anti-social behaviour. However the aggressive over-enforcement of the new rules about keeping dogs on leads at all times is absurd and totally unjustified.”
“Responsible dog owners such as myself are being harassed and forced to pay for no good reason.”
You weren't forced to pay anything, it was for a good reason, and one man's 'harassment' is another man's 'make sure the rules apply to all'...
“I don't believe members of the public want their tax money to be spent on trivial matters, such as well-behaved dogs not being on the lead at all times.”
I do. Ask a lot of people, and they'd say 'Keep the mutts on leads? Great! Where do I vote for this?'
“This doesn't contribute to a better quality of life for anyone in Bristol, in contrast the measures brought in to combat littering, fly-posting and actual anti-social behaviour, of which there is sadly plenty.”
Actually, it's equally as important. And yes, low hanging fruit and all that, granted. But if a law it passed, it should apply to all equally. That means you too.
"When I think about how many other genuine problems there are in the city and how underfunded so many public services are, I get quite angry that the council is wasting resources in this manner.”
Then keep your dogs on a lead. Then there's no waste, is there?
7 comments:
I adore dogs but when Mr Piper takes his pet(s) into the town centre, he should assume that they are as much despised as town hall jobsworths and (should you ever see one) Roly Poly Plod.
MTG
Having watched the video it seems to me that the dogs and owners were sitting at tables on the forecourt of a cafe. If the local Order relates to “public places” then the dog owners would not be committing an offence.
There are many rules/laws which in my humble opinion are absurd and totally unjustified, however I comply with them until such time as they are rescinded/repealed. Isn't that what being a member of society is about?
" If the local Order relates to “public places” then the dog owners would not be committing an offence."
Tricky one. But if there's access to the public space, I can see why the concern. It only takes a second for an unrestrained mutt to dash into the road and cause an accident.
" Isn't that what being a member of society is about?"
You'd think so, wouldn't you?
Julia "ban what I dislike" M,
Appears you dislike or more accurately - based on your posts - hate dogs; why?
Dogs are similar to children, they want to run and play. Like children they need training, boundaries and security* and knowing who is boss.
A well trained dog (dog & human friendly), as most are, is not a problem.
You advocate restricting liberty and punishing the majority for the crimes of a minority.
As a libertarian, it's extreme hypocrisy.
Mr Piper, said: “I am strongly in favour of fines being issued to combat littering, dog fouling, and other anti-social behaviour. However the aggressive over-enforcement of the new rules about keeping dogs on leads at all times is absurd and totally unjustified.”
“Responsible dog owners such as myself are being harassed and forced to pay for no good reason.”
Mr Piper is correct. It's become a new revenue source for councils: make a law prohibiting normal responsible behaviour - kerching £££££
How about:
Strict Liability Law: All cats** must be on lead and supervised by responsible adult at all times outside home, their faeces must be picked up. £150 fixed penalty for contravention.
Does that meet your "libertarian" values too?
Finally, please stop replying a week or more later then never replying to rebuttals. Be interactive.
Cheers,
Pcar
* Security - our old Black Lab now stops and wants put on lead at end of walk before pavement & car.
** and children
The Council is absolutely correct on this. Free roaming dogs are a menace, the ones that "I didn't see it had stopped, otherwise I would have picked it up. I always do", even ones that are "just being friendly, he/she really likes you", as they slather worm-egg infested spittle all over some screaming child's face. As for the ones that "have never done anything like that before, I'm really sorry", as they tear chunks out of some random pedestrian, well...prevention is better that euthanasia, although that comes a close second.
"Appears you dislike or more accurately - based on your posts - hate dogs; why?"
No, I like dogs. I prefer cats, but I have nothing against well trained, well socialised dogs. I had two growing up, both mixed breeds, both lovely animals.
What I hate is the modern trend for anthropomorphism. They are animals. Not people.
"... punishing the majority for the crimes of a minority."
Is it punishment to expect people to keep control of their animal, then?
"Finally, please stop replying a week or more later then never replying to rebuttals. "
The weekend is usually the only time I get to respond!
"...well...prevention is better that euthanasia, although that comes a close second."
If we can extend it to the owners, sure!
Post a Comment