So Do I, Louise, So Do I....

Louise Hart believes education is key. 'Every year, 35,000 dogs under the age of three are put to sleep for behavioural issues,' she says. 'At Dogs Trust we want to improve that figure.'

Me too. But I want to see it go UP! So many dangerous unsocialised mutts in the hands of careless or actively unsocial owners.

These idiots, however, are firmly in the 'Awww, poor doggy!' crowd, of course...

'When a dog bites, it really is the last resort for them and a lot of our resources for people of all ages are about reading body language. Learning, for example, when dogs are showing fear, like having their ears back or their tail between their legs, and knowing there is potential danger around that.'

Yes, because when your child is savaged by some chav's pitbull-substitute, it's your fault - or theirs - for not reading the signs. 

Those sentiments are echoed by Debby Lucken, who has also founded Kids Around Dogs, an association of dog and childcare professionals set up to educate children in how to be more 'dog-savvy'.

'I feel that the owners themselves are not learning enough about dogs,' she says. 'Dogs speak to us all the time, but we need to learn their language in order to understand what makes them upset and, ultimately, scared.

'Almost all dog-related incidents are due to dogs being pushed to their limits.'

Really..? What pushed this one, overwork? The fact so many bad guys he'd caught escaped justice?  

Never Forget The True Agenda Of These 'Animal Lovers'...

Exotic-looking pet cats like the one kicked by footballer Kurt Zouma in a horrifying Snapchat video could be banned in the UK.

Widespread fury over the shamed West Ham defender’s antics has prompted calls for hybrid Bengal animals to be outlawed.

Wait, what? Some barely human savage acts as his true nature dictates, and these people want to outlaw everyone else's pets? 

With the backing of TV animal expert Chris Packham, the Wildheart Trust has launched a campaign for a legal ban on the breeding of exotic cats with domestic cats.

Ah, say no more - publicity-hungry tv celebrity joins forces with 'young, dynamic and determined charity' that wants to get in on the 'Born Free' action...

In an open letter to environment secretary George Eustice, the charity called on the government to ‘end this cruel form of hybridisation’.

They wrote: ‘Motivated by the “designer pet” trade, fuelled by social media, the breeding of exotic felids and domestic cats (known as F1 hybrids) should have no place in the 21st century.

‘It is no less cruel than breeding a wolf with a poodle. This practice is also an escalating problem – evidenced by the dramatic rise in rescues of F1 hybrid cats in 2021.

‘We have a moral responsibility to treat animals with dignity and not as commodities to be corrupted for pleasure or commercial gain.

‘Urgent legislative action to make this form of hybridisation illegal will prevent the suffering of individual animals caught up in this trade and mitigate against future threats to wild populations of exotic felids.’

What does the public think? Are they on board with this radical agenda? 

That'll be a big 'No!' then. Probably not because they have Bengals or Savannahs, but because they have cats. Ordinary moggies. 

And they know that if this campaign succeeds the charity and this snivelling sentimental celebutard will find some way to come for them next...

If They Were Secure In Their Own Lives...

...they wouldn't seek to destroy the lives of dissenters:

Former barrister James Esses said he was concerned many youngsters were confused about gender identity and, wrongly, were automatically categorised as transgender or fast-tracked into making life-altering decisions such as undergoing major surgery.

But after sharing his concerns on social media, Mr Esses, 29, claims he became a victim of a belief that young children know their own minds about gender.

Rather like all the victims of the belief that 'children don't lie about abuse'... 

First, he was told to leave a five-year degree course because of his 'social media activity'.

And nor was that enough for the activists: 

Ten days later, Childline told him he could no longer be a volunteer counsellor.

They probably shouldn't have picked on a lawyer, though: 

He is now taking legal action against the Metanoia Institute in West London, where he was studying for a Masters in psychotherapy.

Here's hoping he wins. Because it's no longer about just the issue of mad transgender advocates harming children or making it impossible to know who is committing crime. It's greater than that: 

Mr Esses believes the way society is currently debating the issue is a watershed moment.

'This is not just about protecting children, it's also about free speech,' he said. 'If we keep going down this path, people will be far too afraid to say what they feel.

'Children's well-being and free speech are so vital that I feel it is my duty to keep speaking out.'

It's all our duty. Because - like Mr Esses - I think society is at a crossroads. And we will look back at this period in time as we looked back at the criminilisation of homosexuality, or the incarceration of slightly-mentally challenged people in secure mental asylums. 

As an abomination. 

Skewed Priorities...

'We need to find out who these people are and make examples of them. ... 'Perpetrators should be getting a knock on the door from the police and facing the full force of the law.'

Finally, a law and order Tory government demands tough action against...well, who?

Muggers? 

People who try to destroy others' lives? 

Those who see taxpayers as a never-ending well of cash to plunder for their identity politics agendas? 

Feral animals making our streets danger zones?

Well, no. It's people who tweet monkey pictures at grossly overpaid black football players. But isn't that a task for the social media companies? Are they doing nothing?

Twitter yesterday revealed how it has removed more than 1,000 racist posts targeting England football stars following the defeat.

So why is the government weighing in? 

Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden said yesterday that he shared the anger at the abuse, adding: 'Social media companies need to up their game in addressing it and, if they fail to, our new Online Safety Bill will hold them to account with fines of up to 10 per cent of global revenue.'

Ah. Of course. 

Control The Language, Advance The Agenda...

New guidelines have been created for reporting on road collisions...

Did we need them? 

...following in the footsteps of similar best practice on stories relating to suicide, domestic violence and refugees.

Oh, wait, I see where this is going... 

The draft guidelines, which have been put out for consultation in the hope of becoming an agreed industry standard, come after years of cyclists feeling frustrated by road deaths being painted as “unavoidable accidents” rather than “the result of very avoidable criminal behaviour”.

But not by them, of course. Oh no! 

The new suggested rules could ban the use of the word “accident” when describing collisions and crashes to meet higher standards of impartiality, especially when the facts of what happened are not yet known.

Well, that's actually quite logical, I'll grant you. 

They also want journalists to avoid mention of helmets, high-vis or any other protective equipment “except when demonstrably relevant” and call for human actors to always be mentioned in coverage of collisions – for example by saying a driver, not a car, hit a cyclist.

 And so's the latter. It's always been a personal peeve of mine. But the mention of lack of safety clothing is perverse...

Who is arguing for this, anyway?

The guidelines have been produced by the University of Westminster’s Active Travel Academy in collaboration with the National Union of Journalists’ ethics council, state-approved press regulator Impress, road safety charities and a range of policing, academic and expert figures.

Ah. The usual suspects. 

H/T: James via Twitter 

The Devil Is In The Detail...

...the detail of the comment section, that is:

A doctor was attacked by a patient and has refused to return to a surgery deemed unsafe, it was revealed today.

And a child with asthma had to be sent to hospital because the surgery had no nurse on duty.

The problems were highlighted as health chiefs backed a decision to close a branch surgery because the family doctors running it said that it was the safest option for staff and patients.

You'd expect this surgery to be in Moss Side, not Brighton!

Tory city councillor for Rottingdean Joe Miller said: “I’m very disappointed for residents. I think the CCG has made the wrong decision for patients who they are meant to represent and serve.”

The £16,475 annual rent will be reinvested in the primary care budget.

Wait, how much rent?

Mike Holdgate, a lay member of the Primary Care Commissioning Committee, said that there were a great many benefits to closing the practice even though it may not seem so on the surface.

What could he mean by th...

Ah!

How very interesting...