Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Pit bulls win reprieve from destruction

Colin Brown
Thursday 27 February 1997 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Magistrates are to be given the power to save savage dogs from destruction in a change to the Dangerous Dogs Act ordered by Michael Howard, the Home Secretary.

The change came after criticism by a committee of MPs, but was seen at Westminster as an attempt by the Government to appeal to the pet-owning voters who have campaigned for dogs to be reprieved from destruction under the Act.

Magistrates were given the powers to seize and destroy dangerous dogs in 1991 after a wave of reported attacks on children by pit bull terriers, a type of fighting dog, which had been imported to Britain from the United States.

It cleared the streets of pit bull terriers, but it led to a series of embarrassing cases for the Government, in which magistrates found difficulty in identifying the breeds.

The change will depend on the passage of a Private Members' Bill by Roger Gale, the Tory MP for North Thanet, which is due for its second reading in the Commons tomorrow. This would provide more flexibility in implementing the Act.

Tom Sackville, the Home Office minister, defended the decision by Kenneth Baker, then Home Secretary, to introduce the law. Mr Sackville said: "The Act was deliberately draconian, designed to deal quickly with a deeply unpleasant problem. Too many children's' lives have been blighted by dangerous dogs. The Home Secretary of the day was totally justified."

The amendments would allow a court limited discretion to order a mandatory destruction of a dog unless it was satisfied that it would be safe not to do so. It would also allow the reopening of the index of exempted dogs in "rare cases where owners have legitimate reasons for not having registered their dogs".

During the five years of its existence, dog groups have criticised the Act as rushed, too harsh and ill-conceived; it was complicated by the fact that the pit-bull is not a pure breed.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in