An Old Dog That Clearly Can’t Learn A New Trick…

Every new pet dog will be microchipped under sweeping Government regulations to combat dangerous animals.

Each puppy born and dog sold will have an electronic chip implanted under the skin. Details will then be placed on a national database accessible by police and the RSPCA.

I just love statements like that, where the MSM recycle government plans as if they will happen, and everyone will obey.

And I particularly love blanket policies to address a specific problem, whereby elderly Mrs Jones with her arthritic Pekingese or teacup Chihuahua  is compelled to join a scheme to register and control ‘dangerous dogs’, a problem mainly caused by a tiny section of society, to whit Stabby McChav and his muscular pitbull crossbreed.

The department involved, DEFRA, is happy to justify the proposed policy:

A Defra spokesperson said: ‘Dangerous dogs and how to tackle the problem of dog attacks are very serious issues and we’re working with the police and welfare groups on the best possible measures for dealing with them. We will be announcing what we will do to tackle them soon.’

You’ve just announced it. In the ‘Mail’. Which is, of course, carrying water for the policy:

Police forces currently find it difficult to trace owners of violent dogs and bring their owners to justice because many have no collars or distinguishing markings.

It then gives some examples of cases of dangerous dogs causing death, the better to scare the readers:

There has been a series of deaths after savage attacks by dangerous breeds. In 2009 John Paul Massey, four, died after he was mauled by his uncle’s illegal pitbull terrier.

Last December, Barbara Williams was killed after she was mauled to death at her home in Wallington, Surrey, by a giant Belgian mastiff.

Notice anything about those cases? Yup, that’s right. In each one, the police had no trouble whatsoever identifying who owned the dogs. They were living with, or related to, or had a business relationship (landlord) with the deceased.

This is so obvious a FAIL! that even a Lib Dem MP can see it:

Liberal Democrat MP John Thurso said of the plans: ‘It’s compulsion and I don’t like it. People who have dangerous dogs that are against the law will take no notice of this.

‘This will result in a disproportionate burden on the law-abiding who keep dogs and especially those who need dogs for their work such as farmers who keep kennels. They will be stuck with another expense and piece of legislation to obey.’

Even some of iDave’s formerly obediant companions are baring their teeth and refusing to come to heel:

Aidan Burley, Conservative MP for Cannock Chase, said: ‘What army of bureaucrats will enforce the monitoring of a microchip in every new pet dog? This is just another layer of costly bureaucracy and it will hit those on lowest incomes the hardest.’

What was it we were hoping about the coalition? That they’d be different from Labour, less inclined to legislate and not so cosy with the big charities?

More fool us, eh?



15 comments for “An Old Dog That Clearly Can’t Learn A New Trick…

  1. William
    April 26, 2011 at 9:59 am

    More smoke and mirrors. The timing of the ‘release’ of this information shows it is a story designed to create maximum obfuscation in the dog loving and dog owning population at large.
    To those that can see through it it is a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
    To those that can see beyond it it is just another way of dragging in some much needed funds and controlling a larger portion of the population.
    To those who fear dangerous dogs its very welcome.
    To those who believe technology can solve all ills its very welcome.
    To those in office who want to hide something in plain sight it is vital.

  2. April 26, 2011 at 10:35 am

    There are a whole raft of assumptions in this that I love. That this will cause no inconvenience or expense to Mrs Jones. That Stabby McChav will comply in full. That Clipboard Man will, in his infinite wisdom, only bring down the force of the law on Stabby McChav for non-registration, and not on Mrs Jones when the Post Office loses the registration form that she posted.

    And, best of all, that the police who allegedly can’t identify the owners of all these dogs, will nevertheless be able to read the microchip number of the dog as it runs away from the scene of the crime while they are still sitting in their police station deciding whether attending would be a reasonable use of their limited resources. That’s one powerful microchip reader they have there…

    • April 26, 2011 at 10:45 am

      It’s particularly apposite that they announced it within about 24 hours of this story, where they didn’t even bother looking for a microchip in the first place!

      • April 27, 2011 at 8:40 am

        I saw that story – really feel for the family… If anything happened to my pup, I’d be devastated.

  3. April 26, 2011 at 10:36 am

    Stabby McChav

    Love that name. Nice one, Julia…

  4. April 26, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    ‘It’s compulsion and I don’t like it. People who have dangerous dogs that are against the law will take no notice of this.

    The blurring between the parties is becoming more pronounced, lending weight to the contention, as if it ever needed lending weight to, that there is little to choose from in the attitudes of a substantial proportion of the 650 MPs.

  5. April 26, 2011 at 2:01 pm

    Yay! This particular regulation was sponsored by The European Association of Pet Chip Manufacturers and Traders.

    See also “sheep tagging”.

    • April 26, 2011 at 2:39 pm

      An unholy alliance of special interests? And we sneer at the US?! At least their lobbyists are quite open…

  6. April 26, 2011 at 2:02 pm

    Aha. I see that despite logging on to WordPress as myself, this still swallows my comments, or they go to comment mod, or whatever. That’s a bit annoying, TBH.

    • April 26, 2011 at 2:35 pm

      I don’t know where they are going or why.

      • April 26, 2011 at 2:37 pm

        I’ve asked our techie about it.

  7. WitteringWitney
    April 26, 2011 at 3:50 pm

    “What was it we were hoping about the coalition? That they’d be different from Labour, less inclined to legislate and not so cosy with the big charities?”

    More fool those that thought the Coalition would be different, perhaps – and no offence intended. They’re damn politicians and like Dalmations never change their spots. They only know control and yet more control – in the hope we may come to believe they are so much wiser than us – and there’s no bigger fool than a wise fool!

  8. April 27, 2011 at 8:42 am

    Does seem a bit pointless. There are definitely advantages to having your dog chipped – mine is. But it shouldn’t be compulsory. As pointed out by many above, the people who breed dangerous dogs are practically feral themselves, and they’re the ones that need putting down. What are the chances that they’ll actually obey this new rule?

    Personally, I’m waiting for the time when all people have to be microchipped – I just hope they can include Oyster in mine, I’m always losing my card…

    • April 27, 2011 at 6:09 pm

      My cats are chipped (it was a condition of their pet insurance) even though they are indoor only, and if I had a dog, I’d ensure that was chipped too. But it’s not foolproof; the chip can move.

      And I’m sure there’s some scientist that’s had a RFID chip implanted in his arm already, isn’t there? 😉

  9. April 27, 2011 at 9:28 am

    Aww Epic topic, I own five Bull Terriers and three Malamutes, there so much fun.

Comments are closed.