http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090709/tuk-weapon-dogs-are-seized-by-police-6323e80.html

How sad for these dogs, we all know the fate that awaits them all because of the 'no marks' that have owned them. Just shows that the DDA hasn't worked as they would never have been bred otherwise. However, probably a better fate than the life they have been made to lead.

Well there are plenty more being mated and born as we speak to take there place. Wont make any difference, pits are everywhere.

its allways the dogs that suffer.

Sounds awful for the dogs.  The DDA like any law - will be flouted - but at least if it's being re-enforced it may be a deterrent.  Terrible lives many of these dogs lead.

All I can think is - poor, poor dogs.

By Heidi2006   Date 09.07.09 20:20 GMT  Sounds awful for the dogs.  The DDA like any law - will be flouted - but at least if it's being re-enforced it may be a deterrent.

But you have to ask yourself why is it only being enforced now, 18 years after Pitt Bulls were banned? Why was it not being enforced to prevent them being bred in the first place? Personally i think it's just a high profile publicity stunt designed to make the public think something is being done.

It wont deter anyone who still wants a Pitt Bull because confiscating 20 dogs when there are tens of thousands of them in the UK will have no effect whatsoever on the population.  They will still be just as easy to get hold of.

The only reason they chose yeasterday to enforce this was because there is a law being written up as we speak that aims to tackle gang culture in order to reduce knife crime & it has a clause whereby it states that Police will have new powers against known gang members owning 'status' dogs & will now be able to remove thier dogs.

If you thought this was about enforcing the DDA think again!

flyball - you give lots of rational if negative answers.  I'm probably a fool, but I think any move in the right direction is worth praising - no matter the reason[s].  I've always been a bit of a romantic/idealist but believe that - just like with our dogs - positive re-enforcement is the way to go [pity/stupid me?]
What does it matter that it's taken 18 years to enforce - it is being enforced [on this ocassion] and if public opinion applauds this it could help the problem - yes it should have been addressed before now but any attempts to sort it should be encouraged IMO even if it's just a publicity stunt re gang culture.  Unfortunately this is a massive problem that cannot be resolved by one event, I am encouraged by any step in the right direction though.

What does it matter if it has taken 18 years to enforce? Perhaps you should ask that to the people who's children have been scarred for life by illegal breeds that the authorities have turned a blind eye to for the last 2 decades. Closing the barn door after the horse bolted springs to mind.

Flyball - sorry - of course it matters - especially to those affected as you've said.  What I was trying to say that it's better late than never, let's not knock an attempt to, at least, reduce this problem now - get the horses back in the stables and shut the door?  I don't believe this problem will ever completely go away, but, like  for example, hereditary defects in dog breeds, problems can be drastically reduced by those with the will and the way [as they say].

> What does it matter if it has taken 18 years to enforce? Perhaps you should ask that to the people who's children have been scarred for life by illegal breeds that the authorities have turned a blind eye to for the last 2 decades. Closing the barn door after the horse bolted springs to mind.

The irresponsible owners of illegal breeds that have injured children, would still have dogs capable of injuring children if the autorities had inforced the DDA and most likely would have still caused children to be injured. As we all know (and so do the authorities, hence the new plans for the new dog control bill) , that it is not the BREED that is the problem, it is the OWNER. Many, dogs are capeable of inflicting serious injuries on children, but it's the dogs owned by prats that are the problem. There is no way that ijuries caused by pitbulls can be blamed on the authorities.

As you say further up the thread, there are many, many illegal pitbulls about, but how often do we hear of them actually injuring somebody?? Not very often, as thankfully, not all of them are owned by the macho 'my dog is harder than you' brigade.

Any step in the right direction is good and with good publicity hopefully will make the other idiots re-consider using weapon dogs. This is the problem, DOGS used as weapons, not particular breeds, which is why the DDA is not effective in preventing injuries caused by dogs owned by utter prats as it only bans a few breeds, not irresponsible ownership.

The DDA itself is pretty much 'closing the barn door after the horse has bolted', because it can only destroy dogs that have allready caused/show signs of causing damage to people (other than the banned breeds), it does nothing to prevent irresponsible dog ownership in the first place.

The police acting now, is most proabably due to the fact that there is an alarming, growing trend in 'weapon dogs', not much can be done (yet) about legal breeds owned for status & weapons, but they can make a start by gettting the pitbulls off of the gangs.
I feel very sorry for the dogs, but I doubt they have a very good life anyway and being PTS may be a nicer alternative for them :(

There are a lot of dangerous dogs out there and not all pit bulls. When reported, if attacks are dog to dog attacks the police don't want to know and turn a blind eye. My point being that many of these dogs go on to attack people or heaven forbid children. Many of the owners are not hooligans but uninformed pet owners who buy a dog not realising the pit conections. By the time someone points out that what they have is a pit cross they have formed an attachment to the dog and refuse to have them put to sleep even though they show agressive tendancies and even attack pet owners dogs in the dog parks. Decisions should be taken out of their hands and the law enforced by the police to prevent fatalaties to both people and other pet dogs. What is the point in passing a law and then not enforcing it?

The dogs and puppies siezed in this particular raid were owned by a woman who had been "warned" about them before according to reports.   They were also living at the same address as a known drug dealer - which is one of the reasons given for them being seized as weapons.

dawn had a pit x cross that had been confiscated(they tend to target drug dealers/people known to them) in her kennels at work(police) and could hear it whining,so took it some water and treats knowing it was going to be p.t.s that day,she wanted to let it out for a wee but the doors are sealed as its regarded as a dangerous dog.she said there was no sign of aggression or anything and it really upset her knowing this dogs fate later that day.here in london the "staffs" are getting bigger,rangier and there are now boxer,ddb,neo crosses.they have become the new mongrel as they no longer really resemble the staffs we see at shows.our fear when walking rumble our ddb is these dogs being set after him,and was another reason not to breed with him as we felt we couldnt keep track of his offspring and what they would be used on,as papers mean nothing to a lot of these kids. many are given the option to go to court to get thier dogs back after theyve been confiscated as long as they agree to muzzle/neuter/go on register, etc but cant be bothered as thay can just go out and buy another pup.sad.

Well - I've been trying to find statistics for different breeds of dogs and the incidence of biting -  can anyone els find it?  I remember some years ago that labs and Golden Retrievers were top of the Hit List - probably because they were [and maybe still are?] the most common breeds.  Can't find the stats - mostly dramatic reporting by various news stations - both UK and USA. 
It just seems common sense to me that the more of a breed there is in a country the more often there will be reported dog bites.  I know breeding, homing etc are also very important ; but for the media Pit Bull etc sound far more exciting and newsworthy than child eating Labrador. 
roynrumble - very sad you feel you cannot breed but applaud your integrity and care for your offspring.

Gosh - just read another post re black labs being sued for knocking someone down - had no idea before I wrote this - what I've said still stands but got to add I have an number of close friends with black labs, [working type mostly] have had a GR and Flat coatXGSD so no bias going on on my part - genuine thoughts only.
by the way a friend of mine had a serious knee injury caused by her own [lurcher type] dog careering into her - she can't sue herself tho.