Death Row Dogs on BBC1 now. 10.35pm
Tissues on the ready i think!

They are dirty rotten scumbags. The state of the houses and the conditions the poor dogs are kept in :-(

and the so called dangerous dog wagged its tail all through the lethal injection :o(

Just awful to watch! Words fail me!
My JRT was like one of the dogs on the programme, she had never been walked in her life, she used run and hide in the house when i used to get her lead! She lived outside in all weathers, no heating & bedding, overgrown nails and full of bald patches!
Where on earth do these 'owners' come from!
I know what i'd like do with that pink fluid used to put that dog to sleep!!!!

> They are dirty rotten scumbags.

I didn't see all of the program so maybe there were some scumbags :) but certainly some of the people I saw I felt were simply people whom life had dealt a very low hand.  Not really coping at all.  Very sad all round.

It is sad these dogs were ever bought into existance to live like that but they do not know they are going to sleep for ever so I find no sadness in that.  
They would be no more wanted than any of the thousands of other dogs discarded into dogs homes every year.

> It is sad these dogs were ever bought into existance to live like that but they do not know they are going to sleep for ever so I find no sadness in that

Absolutely agree.

>and the so called dangerous dog wagged its tail all through the lethal injection :o(

My impression was that certain Police Officers in this documentary clearly felt that there should be a change in the law so that certain dogs could be spared. Do we think there should be a change in the law to stop the 'catch all' system that is inplace now? Who would/should have the final say on such dogs?

> My impression was that certain Police Officers in this documentary clearly felt that there should be a change in the law so that certain dogs could be spared. Do we think there should be a change in the law to stop the 'catch all' system that is inplace now? Who would/should have the final say on such dogs?

Who would have these dogs if they were saved?
They cant go back to the owners who allowed the dogs to get to that situation, and with rescues full to bursting and turning away all staff types, who will take dogs spared on appeal?

and the so called dangerous dog wagged its tail all through the lethal injection :o(

So sad,   all he wanted was to be loved..............BUT........... what is the alternative, would you leave that dog in the home it was in,   as sad as it was. being PTS , was the kindest  outcome for him, and all the others that find themselves in such situations.

Not one of those dogs featured  should live like that,  even of they were NOT  types,   to return them to the homes they came from, is a far worse fate than  being PTS..

Oh sounds sad :( I had no idea it was on and would like to watch it, its good sometimes to bring your self to reality of what happens, even if it is to sad to watch, makes u gratefull for what you have. Does anybody know if it is repeated at all? and what channel and day and time??

As it was BBC you can watch it on iPlayer no doubt, either online or on BT Vision or similar on your telly.

I dont have iPlayer ot BT Vision :( So will try and get it up online :) Thanks :)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01bbvfk/Death_Row_Dogs/

Here it is.

As long as you have a pc/laptop with internet access just google the programme title and loads of links appear or you could go to you library and watch it.

Thank you :)

Thank You :)

it was a very sad programe.  Poor poor dogs.  some of them it was clear the first kindly voice or hand they had felt in a long time was the police officers come to access them and put them down.  pts really was the best option for them though- how could they be sent back to such awlful living conditions? and who would want an unsocialised utterly untrained dog of that type when the rescues are full to bursting with staffies?
the owners all seemed to claim they loved them but they were unwalked, filthy, some half starved,some just ignored outside, urine scalded feet surrounded by dog mess. owners should all have book thrown at them for animal cruelty rather then banned breed.

Yes I watched it on Iplayer.

It was indeed a very sad program to watch. I was not surprised at the state some of the dogs were found in it happens all the time and everywhere. Dog ownership is not controlled in any way in this country and a dogs life is of little importance to many owners.
I do not know what the answer is. No one knows, but sad and horrific as it is some dogs are better of dead. The lovely  "pit bull type " that was PTS gave the immpression of being a great little dog. To cut his life short is a tradgedy but his life being locked in a flat 24/7 would be worse. In an ideal world he would have been rehomed but the state of our rescues makes that option unworkable. The DDA that condems these dogs to death is as the police dog handler stated wrong. But even without his death he may well have lived a huge part of his life in a rescue kennel. The government need to sit up and take notice and activly do something about careless random breeding and keeping dogs in such conditions. The woman had already been convicted of animal cruelty and banned for life from owning an animal and yet our idiotic society allows her to keep in her house a dog "Belonging" to her son. Does that in some way mean she will not hurt it ??? Banned should mean absolutly NO contact with an animal. The rules are so very easy to bend.
It saddens and sickens me but I watched it in order to be more aware of what goes on. We who love and care and look after our dogs so well would weep with shame at some cases. Shame at belonging to the same group of animals (Human) who inflict this on their dogs/cats/horses/whatever.
Just one point I picked up on the kennels the dogs went to looked disgusting and not a place I would want my dogs within a 100 mile radius of. I would be surprised if they passed a council inspection.

Aileen

Sadly there is a Pit bull bitch (well she looks like the most usual example, and that is what he says she is) in the garden backing onto ours kept in a smal shed and little pen chained up. 

The family are Asian and the husband told my OH that he can't keep the dog in the house for religious reasons (the wife and kids don't go near her), but he loves the dog and walks her everyday, but she is so lonely tied up outside on her own with no interaction except when eh coems hoem and takes her out after dark.

She had a litter shortly after they had her, but not since so she isn't being used as a breeding machine (may have got her already pregnant), she had very hanging boobs.

I have considered reporting them, but the dog would be taken and Put down.  He does feed her well she has shelter and he does seem to have a great affection (mutual) for her, so what to do???

The family are Asian and the husband told my OH that he can't keep the dog in the house for religious reasons

Some members of the Asian community see dogs as unclean, this as you say stems from a strong religious background.
See this link below from Wikipedia

"Dogs
Main article: Islam and dogs
The majority of Muslim jurists consider dogs to be ritually unclean, though jurists from the Sunni Maliki school disagree.[24] However, outside their ritual uncleanness, Islamic fatāwā, or rulings, enjoin that dogs be treated kindly or else be freed.[25]
Muslims generally cast dogs in a negative light because of their ritual impurity. The story of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus in the Qur'an (and also the role of the dog in early Christianity) is one of the striking exceptions.[26] Muhammad did not like dogs according to Sunni tradition,[citation needed] and most practicing Muslims do not have dogs as pets.[13] It is said that angels do not enter a house which contains a dog. Though dogs are not allowed for pets, they are allowed to be kept if used for work, such as guarding the house or farm, or when used for hunting purposes.
According to a generally unaccepted Sunni tradition attributed to Muhammad, black dogs are evil, or even devils, in animal form. This report reflects the pre-Islamic Arab mythology and the vast majority of Ulema (Muslim jurists) viewed it to be falsely attributed to Muhammad.[24]
Another Sunni tradition attributed to Muhammad commands Muslims not to trade or deal in dogs.[27] According to El Fadl, this shows the cultural biases against dogs as a source of moral danger.[24] However, the Hanafi scholars, the largest school of ritual law in Sunni Islam, allow all trading in dogs.
According to one story, Muhammad is said to have informed a prostitute who had seen a thirsty dog hanging about a well and given it water to drink, that Allah forgave her because of that good deed.[13][28]
In a tradition found in the Sunni hadith book, al-Muwatta, Muhammad states that the company of dogs voids a portion of a Muslim's good deeds.[29]
Dogs, outside the ritual legal discourse, were often portrayed in the literature as a symbol of highly esteemed virtues such as self-sacrifice and loyalty or on the other hand as an oppressive instrument in the hands of despotic and unjust rulers.[24]
The historian William Montgomery Watt states that Muhammad's kindness to animals was remarkable for the social context of his upbringing. He cites an instance of Muhammed posting sentries to ensure that a female dog with newborn puppies was not disturbed by his army traveling to Mecca in the year 630.[30]"

Yes I was aware.

In my view if the religious views/social pressures do not allow the guy to meet fully a dogs needs (companionship etc) he should not have a dog, but I could not live with myself if though my dropping him in the proverbial do do the dog was PTS.

> but I could not live with myself if though my dropping him in the proverbial do do the dog was PTS.

It's a tough one, it shouldn't be up to you to make the decision but I suppose you have to and are doing. Is the dog better being put to sleep,  it won't know anything about it, or being alone 22 hours a day (guessing here) and possibly cold and miserable?

If it were simply a case of a vet coming out to the garden to send the dog to sleep I would do that without hesitation, but it's not, so you also have to consider the trauma of being taken away by strangers, possibly with those horrible nooses, put into a kennel with strange dogs all around it and more strange people,  never getting to see its owner again and then pts.

Generally I would say it's an illegal dog and should be reported, but in the circumstances you've described I'm not sure I could.

It's a tough one.
Clearly the dog is loved by the husband but i guess the wife is at odds with her partner and common ground is met by the dog being kept outside.
If as you say the dog is walked, fed, watered and has shelter from the elements then although this arrangement would not suit you or I, at least his/her basic needs are being met as far as the RSPCA would see it.
There was a dog who was kept in far worse conditions than this near where i used to live. A chain no longer than two or three feet and the RSPCA didn't want to know.
If it were me my mind would be twanging like a piece of elastic.

> being alone 22 hours a day (guessing here) and possibly cold and miserable?

Lots of dogs live perfectly well outside., I know more than one farmer whose wife would not allow their working dog in the house, so not sure why a religious preference would matter, but they did make a point in the program last night that this particular breed is ill equiped to cope with inclement weather.

>>>and the so called dangerous dog wagged its tail all through the lethal injection :o(

So sad,   all he wanted was to be loved..............BUT........... what is the alternative, would you leave that dog in the home it was in,   as sad as it was. being PTS , was the kindest  outcome for him, and all the others that find themselves in such situations.

Not one of those dogs featured  should live like that,  even of they were NOT  types,   to return them to the homes they came from, is a far worse fate than  being PTS..>>>>

which is clearly where this legislation is failing- the dog didnt come across as dangerous unless the filming crew failed to film any dangerous episodes,
hence the UNdangerous dog could have been rehomed if its current home and owner was deemed unsuitable but due to current 'breed not deed' emphasis it had to be killed instead
so sad
yet all the irresponsible owners get to carry on as per norm

> It was indeed a very sad program to watch. I was not surprised at the state some of the dogs were found in it happens all the time and everywhere. Dog ownership is not controlled in any way in this country and a dogs life is of little importance to many owners.I do not know what the answer is. No one knows, but sad and horrific as it is some dogs are better of dead. The lovely  "pit bull type " that was PTS gave the immpression of being a great little dog. To cut his life short is a tradgedy but his life being locked in a flat 24/7 would be worse. In an ideal world he would have been rehomed but the state of our rescues makes that option unworkable. The DDA that condems these dogs to death is as the police dog handler stated wrong. But even without his death he may well have lived a huge part of his life in a rescue kennel. The government need to sit up and take notice and activly do something about careless random breeding and keeping dogs in such conditions. The woman had already been convicted of animal cruelty and banned for life from owning an animal and yet our idiotic society allows her to keep in her house a dog "Belonging" to her son. Does that in some way mean she will not hurt it ??? Banned should mean absolutly NO contact with an animal. The rules are so very easy to bend.It saddens and sickens me but I watched it in order to be more aware of what goes on. We who love and care and look after our dogs so well would weep with shame at some cases. Shame at belonging to the same group of animals (Human) who inflict this on their dogs/cats/horses/whatever.Just one point I picked up on the kennels the dogs went to looked disgusting and not a place I would want my dogs within a 100 mile radius of. I would be surprised if they passed a council inspection. Aileen

"Like"

I had an argument with someone not long ago about dog ownership being a privellage, not a right. Certainly there are a great many people who should never be allowed near an animal yet they seem perfectly able to be legally allowed to own dogs. If it is a right to own a dog then with right comes acceptance of responsibility, both to the dog and the rest of society. If someone cannot accept their responsibilities then IMO they lose their rights. I haven't watched the programme yet, out of interest were the owners of the dogs being kept in the appalling conditions prosecuted by the RSPCA?

BTW. JH has a new post about this on her blog.

> Just one point I picked up on the kennels the dogs went to looked disgusting and not a place I would want my dogs within a 100 mile radius of. I would be surprised if they passed a council inspection.

Aileen, I was sent a link on FB on Monday about how seized dogs in our area are being badly treated - if you didn't get the share, it's here:
Police 'not looking after impounded dogs' says trainer

but they did make a point in the program last night that this particular breed is ill equiped to cope with inclement weather.

It also didn't look like any of the dogs shown had proper shelter. I have one dog living outside (no choice as he doesn't get on with my other male dogs and is not safe with cats) and he has a very thick coat but his kennel is also lined and insulated, he has plenty of bedding etc, and should the weather turn really cold (which it hasn't this year) we have the option of hanging a panel heater on his wall. None of the dogs in the programme even had proper bedding.

I only watched the programme last night. The one thing that struck me above anything else is that it ISN'T the law as such that is wrong, it is the people that constantly break the law. Let's face it, there shouldn't be ANY Pit Bulls around if all had been neutered in 1991. And if an owner somehow gets hold of a dog of the type and wants to keep it as a pet, is a responsible owner and the dog has no problems, then the RESPONSIBLE owner would apply for the license to keep the dog, have it neutered and microchipped and tattooed, insured, muzzled in public etc -that way they'd play safe and would NOT end up having their dog seized. I mean, who of us here would risk keeping a dog illegally, knowing it could be seized and put down? We wouldn't, we'd do everything we could to stop it from happening.

And as for the dogs that clearly weren't Pit Bulls at all (like the nervous Brindle cross breed) -if they'd had good homes to start with, nothing would have happened to them.

> out of interest were the owners of the dogs being kept in the appalling conditions prosecuted by the RSPCA?
>

There was mention at one point of gathering evidence for a possible prosecution on ill treatment.

> [url=http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Police-looking-impounded-dogs-ndash-says-trainer/story-14454983-detail/story.html" rel=nofollow]Police 'not looking after impounded dogs' says trainer[/url]

>Mr McParland was told dogs would only receive veterinary treatment if kennel staff considered it necessary.

  My dogs don't receive veterinary treament unless I consider it necessary.

> My dogs don't receive veterinary treament unless I consider it necessary.

Same here :-)

> And if an owner somehow gets hold of a dog of the type and wants to keep it as a pet, is a responsible owner and the dog has no problems, then the RESPONSIBLE owner would apply for the license to keep the dog, have it neutered and microchipped and tattooed, insured, muzzled in public etc -that way they'd play safe and would NOT end up having their dog seized.

That's what got me with the older woman in the flat - she'd had one pit bull seized from her and destroyed years before, why on earth would she or her son take the same risk again?

Such a sad programme........Felt so sorry for the dogs really-it's not their fault-i am afraid humans have a lot to answer for......

Dr Roger Mugford has posted on FB his response and disgust at the police behaviour in seizing these dogs, makes very interesting reading......

If I was going to blame anyone it would not be the police.  They are just upholding the law as it stands. 
Certainly they came across in the programme as both sympathetic to the dogs and, in some cases, the owners.

I have just read his comment

>No attempt was made to make friends with the dogs

and can't help wondering if he watched the same programme as me.

Hi tigran,I have not read the post on FB but the one thing that impressed me was the approach and professionalism of the police throughout the programme.

Yes I thought that the police were O.K. But in a lengthy article Dr Mugford objects to the use of the lasso and the way the officers yanked the dog off the bed. Apparently Dr Mugford has worked with Police in the Home Counties instructing them in more "humane" methods of dealing with DD, unfortunately I cannot link the article, but found it quite illuminating.

I did not see them doing anything harmful to those dogs other than force them to do something they didn't really want to do which probably included preventing them biting!  In fact, a comment one officer made indicated they were very mindful of not hurting the dog unecessarily.
Bearing in mind the dangers these dogs represent to the officers and the general public and the fact that these seizures seemed to often occur whilst a search operation was on going I can not imagine Dr Mugford is thinking in real world terms.
My guess is, in most countries on such a raid the dog would simply be shot.

> I did not see them doing anything harmful to those dogs other than force them to do something they didn't really want to do which probably included preventing them biting!  In fact, a comment one officer made indicated they were very mindful of not hurting the dog unecessarily.
> Bearing in mind the dangers these dogs represent to the officers and the general public and the fact that these seizures seemed to often occur whilst a search operation was on going I can not imagine Dr Mugford is thinking in real world terms.
> My guess is, in most countries on such a raid the dog would simply be shot.

agree.  I know my parents living in France have heard of police comming out and shooting an accused dangerous dog in its own garden - with no chance of registering it/discussing/court etc

I thought they were being as gentle as they could be in that programe considering things. wouldn't be easy dealing with a frightened dog thats likely never even been on a lead with the owners kicking off in front of it too.   Looking at the filthy hidious conditions most these dogs were kept in I do hope the police work with social services and flag any house that also contains children as no small defencless creature should be forced to live with such terrible people and conditions

Where on earth do these 'owners' come from!

Up my street it seems, we have a women living along our road i have mentioned her before on here, beautiful very large white Alsatian that has not been walked in over 4 year and now she has a pittbull that up untill all the complaining by the tenants around here afetr his constent barking was left outside no warm bedding garden full of dog mess dog out in snow weather and even on bonfire night she left the poor soul outside, All efforts to get something done have been taken but alas to no avail , only when the women was threatened with eviction has she now taken the pi inside where he is locked in an upstairs room and the Alsatian is left in the passage downstairs both dogs still bark all the time as they are left along alot, and must be messing all over their living area,

What i see on that show was Exactly what these 2 dogs are going though, yet no one has done anything, their is no law saying you have to walk you dog  they say!,

i was amazed that when the police seized these dogs on the program that in one case he told the owner they would also be done under section ?? (cant remember exactly the number) of the animal welfare act,  i immediately thought to myself then why oh why have the Usless Rspca just left these dogs with this women,

I have said all along that it should be the owners who or muzzled and neutered (and PTS if I had my way!) rather than the dogs.

Unfortunately, the do-gooders in society beleive that these "types" of people are innocent victims, whereas people who have to live near and work with them know differently.