lazybloke
Priest of the cult of Chris Rea
- Location
- Leafy Surrey
Please, let's not forget the tragic events in which are the topic of this thread.Please, let's not let this descend into another anti-dog thread.
(Link to original story: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-60829837)
I won't speculate on what happened in St Helens, so nothing that follows is linked to the above.
But in response to your quote, I'll say that next to nobody has a problem with legal breeds that are well-kept, well-trained, and are under the control of a loving and responsible owner. I've just described the vast majority of dogs.
So it follows that any anti-dog comments are most likely a commentary on the small or tiny minority of owners & breeders who are irresponsible or "bad". Surely they deserve some ire, or would you find that tiresome in some way?
Two observations:
1) Walk any pavement, alleyway, footpath, etc, and you will see varying degrees of dog fouling, plus bags of the stuff hanging from trees.
2) Visit various local National Trust sites eg my local heathland, and you'll see the overwhelming majority of dogs off leads, despite this being banned due to ground-nesting birds for 5 months of the year (early March to end of July).
Okay, those are trivial breaking of rules compared to the horrific dog attacks we hear of in the news, but it is acceptable that so many dog owners are quite literally prepared to "look the other way" so often? And at what point does a responsible dog-owner become an irresponsible dog-owner; where do you draw the line?
"I didn't see my dog crapping there" is, arguably, an admission that your dog is not under your control. Ditto for letting your dog run through the habitat of endangered nesting birds.
It's not the dogs I blame.