another saved

http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Staffy-attacked-WPc-won-t-4-000-donation/story-17546101-detail/story.html

Great news

To be perfectly honest , if the story is correct I'm not so sure it was the right thing to do, though I feel very sorry for the dog, £4000 would have gone a long way to home a lot more "rehomeable" dogs

Might not be what people want to hear but it's only my thoughts

I have managed to find previous articles to this. In this article it does say that the dog was responding well to training. Fully understand your point of view and agree that if it is 'beyond help' that may be this isnt the best solution. How ever I do know that the local paper here does, as im sure may others do, embellish the truth and leave out certain facts in order to make a good story. Just hope this is the best choice for the dog.
http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Stay-execution-dog-bit-policewoman-Plymouth/story-16854352-detail/story.html

Looks like the dog was trained to attack police therefore not the dogs fault either

Buster bumble wrote:Looks like the dog was trained to attack police therefore not the dogs fault either

Please don't get me wrong as its very sad , but I think a dog trained to attack people even if its a specific type of people will eventually one day get it wrong and that leads to a very dangerous dog. And you are 100% correct it is not the dogs fault.

Just saying , and it would be a decision not taken lightly if I had £4000 in my pocket I would rather it be used on a load of dogs that have a better chance then 1 that is a very high risk, I realise this is not the case as many people have donated , it's just an opinion and I am sure far more complicated than it seems

I think there's more to this than has been reported.
The barrister waived his fee - must have believed in the dog for whatever reason.
Doris Banham Trust does some seriously good work with staffies - very respected trust.

Just a little aside here - some years ago the law was that a dog was allowed a single bite ie before the dog had bitten (a human) it was deemed to be trusted, but if it DID bite a human then it must be kept under very careful control thereafter. Has the law changed in that the first bite and the dog is "out"?

I found this Lynda.

[quote]a single incident is generally insufficient to prove that a dog is dangerous, unless the Court believes that the single incident is exceptional

http://www.doglaw.co.uk/dangerous_act1871.php

Thanks Nai ...

"Generally is dog is regarded as not being under proper control if it is neither on a lead nor muzzled."

"•a dog can show itself to be dangerous in its general behaviour, not just its behaviour towards a person"

Seems we should ALL be careful if we have a dog off lead and not muzzled.

And I wonder what point 2 means "dangerous in its general behaviour" ?

Oh dear ... we are all treading on thin ice these days

What!

This is disgusting. I am not be happy about this. A vicious dog needs a proper home that will look after it and rescues can not legally rehome a vicious dog.

This is purely a bribe and i don't think it is a good example to be setting.