Some Common Sense At Last?

September 13, 2013 2 Comments

Finally, a welcome u-turn:

Dog owners will be safe from prosecution under revised dangerous dogs laws if their pet attacks someone trespassing in their home – even if the “intruder” is doing a good turn.

Ministers say dogs cannot be expected to “ascertain the intentions” of those entering a property before reacting.

Quite. But the actual boundary of the property is, it seems, flexible:

In a response to MPs on the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee – which has made a number of recommendations to ministers – the government rejected the idea of a similar exemption in relation to attacks on people trespassing in gardens or outhouses.

“A child retrieving a ball from a garden, or a neighbour retrieving garden cuttings, should be protected from dog attacks,” officials said.

And also a burglar testing the security of the dwelling or having it away on his toes with your garden tools, by these conditions!

“Such a distinction reflects the higher likelihood of a trespasser inside or entering a dwelling having malign intent,” the response added.

So your home is your castle, but not your shed or garage…

Tags: , ,

2 Responses to Some Common Sense At Last?

  1. September 13, 2013 at 8:49 am

    Does the law say anything about dangerous snakes, though :twisted:

  2. September 13, 2013 at 1:17 pm

    In that case, does the trespassing child get compensation if they injure themselves in another way, say tripping over a loose flag or something.

    A child retrieving a ball should not be on someones property without their permission. Period.

United Kingdom Time


Email us at contact orphans of liberty [all one word] at gmail dot com


For more about these renegades, click on the name to go to a short profile:

James Higham
Mike Cunningham

Orphans logo

Feel free to take this for your sidebar.