Reptile Forum, Reptile Classifieds - CaptiveBred

[Stuart]

Dogs bred for fighting (1) This section applies to—
(a) any dog of the type known as the pit bull terrier;
(b) any dog of the type known as the Japanese tosa; and
(c) any dog of any type designated for the purposes of this section by an order of the Secretary of State, being a type appearing to him to be bred for fighting or to have the characteristics of a type bred for that purpose.
(2) No person shall—
(a) breed, or breed from, a dog to which this section applies;
(b) sell or exchange such a dog or offer, advertise or expose such a dog for sale or exchange;
(c) make or offer to make a gift of such a dog or advertise or expose such a dog as a gift;
(d) allow such a dog of which he is the owner or of which he is for the time being in charge to be in a public place without being muzzled and kept on a lead; or
(e) abandon such a dog of which he is the owner or, being the owner or for the time being in charge of such a dog, allow it to stray.
(3) After such day as the Secretary of State may by order appoint for the purposes of this subsection no person shall have any dog to which this section applies in his possession or custody except—
(a) in pursuance of the power of seizure conferred by the subsequent provisions of this Act; or
(b) in accordance with an order for its destruction made under those provisions;
but the Secretary of State shall by order make a scheme for the payment to the owners of such dogs who arrange for them to be destroyed before that day of sums specified in or determined under the scheme in respect of those dogs and the cost of their destruction.
(4) Subsection (2)(b) and (c) above shall not make unlawful anything done with a view to the dog in question being removed from the United Kingdom before the day appointed under subsection (3) above.
(5) The Secretary of State may by order provide that the prohibition in subsection (3) above shall not apply in such cases and subject to compliance with such conditions as are specified in the order and any such provision may take the form of a scheme of exemption containing such arrangements (including provision for the payment of charges or fees) as he thinks appropriate.
(6) A scheme under subsection (3) or (5) above may provide for specified functions under the scheme to be discharged by such persons or bodies as the Secretary of State thinks appropriate.
(7) Any person who contravenes this section is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both except that a person who publishes an advertisement in contravention of subsection (2)(b) or (c)—
(a) shall not on being convicted be liable to imprisonment if he shows that he published the advertisement to the order of someone else and did not himself devise it; and
(b) shall not be convicted if, in addition, he shows that he did not know and had no reasonable cause to suspect that it related to a dog to which this section applies.
( An order under subsection (1)(c) above adding dogs of any type to those to which this section applies may provide that subsections (3) and (4) above shall apply in relation to those dogs with the substitution for the day appointed under subsection (3) of a later day specified in the order.
(9) The power to make orders under this section shall be exercisable by statutory instrument which, in the case of an order under subsection (1) or (5) or an order containing a scheme under subsection (3), shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament
_________________

[mark]

for MJ


i cant be arsed to argue with you as your just pissing me off he has one its a great dog was just trying to help him out yes he shouldnt have it but fact is he has

as for fighting its common knowledge these are used for dog fighting hence i thought that was what you was getting at.

sdc?
_________________
boas and burms

[mark]

all seems sketchy stu thats for sure
_________________
boas and burms

[sam]

If the dangerous dogs act was an ideal piece of legislation i wouldnt think your friend would have much trouble to be honest, as from what you say he seems to be responsible. Unfortunately, the DDA is far from ideal. It uses a dogs breed to distinguish its character, which doesnt make much sense to me as far as dangerous dogs go - no one dog is ever truly representative of a breeds character and behaviour as all dogs differ. It sort of implies that no mongrels could ever be "dangerous", or that all dogs of other breeds are harmless whilst all dogs of the mentioned breeds are dangerous.

Ideal or not, it is still the law and should be adhered too. Unfortunately this will probably lead to the confiscation and destruction of the dog in question... yet another case of the law only burning those who try/want to abide by it.

There are still so many non-dangerous dogs in need of rescue, so if your friend wants to make a difference to a dogs life they can go and get a couple of these.
_________________
Interested in amphibians? Join us at Myamphibia for friendly banter, amazing pictures and great information. Make some amphibious friends today!

[johonny]

[mark]

he didnt buy the dog to rescue it that was just a bonus
_________________
boas and burms

[MJ]

_________________
Paul

For all your Tropical plant and Naturalistic Vivarium needs please enjoy Urban Bromeliad