Vandalism of a lovely guy's boat

[Jerra]

Fortunately the application of the law doesn't just rely on somebody thinking 'ooh that dog is dangerous'.

 

Otherwise it could be applied vindictively and without proper consideration as to whether the dog in question is actually a risk to others or not.

The statement is:

 

Your dog is considered dangerously out of control if it:

• injures someone
• makes someone worried that it might injure them

That to me is clear enough if it makes somebody worried that they may be injured. Who other than the person concerned is going to decide if they are worried or not.

 

Ref: From www.gov.uk/controlling-dog-public/overview

 

I know it isn't a quote from the exact text of the law but why should the government say that unless the law says it but in less understandable terms.

[Guest]

The statement is:

 

Your dog is considered dangerously out of control if it:

 

• injures someone
• makes someone worried that it might injure them

That to me is clear enough if it makes somebody worried that they may be injured. Who other than the person concerned is going to decide if they are worried or not.

 

Ref: From www.gov.uk/controlling-dog-public/overview

 

I know it isn't a quote from the exact text of the law but why should the government say that unless the law says it but in less understandable terms.

Yes I know what that says. I think we have discussed this exact issue previously.

 

I am also correct in stating that a prosecution will not ensue solely on the whim of somebody who thinks a dog will injure them.

 

Beyond that I add no further comment because refuting some of the nonsense that appears on this forum often results in the tit for tat arguments that are not permitted but unfortunately mean the nonsense that gets spouted goes unchallenged, just as this will.

 

So you believe what you like Jerra.

[furnessvale]

The statement is:

 

Your dog is considered dangerously out of control if it:

• injures someone
• makes someone worried that it might injure them

That to me is clear enough if it makes somebody worried that they may be injured. Who other than the person concerned is going to decide if they are worried or not.

 

Ref: From www.gov.uk/controlling-dog-public/overview

 

I know it isn't a quote from the exact text of the law but why should the government say that unless the law says it but in less understandable terms.

I would think the usual "reasonable man" test will apply.

 

IMO, in this case, a person of average courage, without an irrational fear of dogs would fit this test, but it is for a judge to decide.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[cuthound]

I would think the usual "reasonable man" test will apply.

 

IMO, in this case, a person of average courage, without an irrational fear of dogs would fit this test, but it is for a judge to decide.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

This is what I hope will happen. Hopefully I will find out in July, when I attend the presentation.

[furnessvale]

This is what I hope will happen. Hopefully I will find out in July, when I attend the presentation.

It should do. It is a well accepted legal principle when deciding such matters.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[magnetman]

 

I would think the usual "reasonable man" test will apply.

 

IMO, in this case, a person of average courage, without an irrational fear of dogs would fit this test, but it is for a judge to decide.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

(Or woman)

 

Edited.

Edited May 11, 2016 by magnetman

[furnessvale]

(Or woman)

 

Edited.

Fortunately, political correctness to that extent does not yet seem to have reached the court system.

 

They seem quite happy to refer to the "man on the Clapham omnibus" or a "reasonable man" test.

 

I make no comment as to whether a woman in such circumstances would be either on the tube or unreasonable!

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[magnetman]

Just call me Loretta

[Athy]

I would think the usual "reasonable man" test will apply.

 

, a person of average courage, without an irrational fear of dogs would fit this test, but it is for a judge to decide.

 

(or bitches).

[magnetman]

[BruceinSanity]

Just call me Loretta

Are you betta? Are you well, well, well?

[magnetman]

I want to be a woman

[Peter Reed]

Are you betta? Are you well, well, well?

I hate to be a smart arse,which I'm not, That was Rosetta.

[David Mack]

I hate to be a smart arse,which I'm not, That was Rosetta.

She was probably stoned!