pitgal Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 QUADRIPLEGIC Justin Taylor's best mate Fonzie sits on death row, his fate in the hands of a Gold Coast magistrate. Mr Taylor insists Fonzie is an american staffordshire terrier. The Gold Coast City Council, however, believes the animal is a banned pit bull-type breed. The dispute has set the stage for a test case of Queensland's recently introduced dangerous dog laws. Crippled in a surfing accident five years ago, Mr Taylor, 29, bought Fonzie to help cheer him up. ``He's my best mate -- my therapy dog -- and I couldn't bear to lose him,'' he said yesterday. But while Mr Taylor was in hospital having a bladder operation last month, Fonzie escaped from his parents' house and was impounded by the council. ``The next thing I knew, I received a destruction notice from the council,'' he said. ``They declared Fonzie dangerous on the basis of a 24-point checklist which many vets will tell you is seriously flawed. ``Many of the characteristics used to determine so-called dangerous dogs apply to all dogs, even chihuahuas. ``It's a farce. It's not as if Fonzie got out and attacked someone.'' Mr Taylor admits Fonzie was unregistered, but says that is the only crime. ``He's a gentle, people-friendly dog, and if I thought he posed the slightest danger I wouldn't have him.'' Fonzie will be impounded until Mr Taylor's appeal is heard in Southport Magistrate's Court in September. Gold Coast councillor Dawn Crichlow is lobbying the council to allow Fonzie to return home until then. ``I think it's cruel, really cruel,'' she said. ``Fonzie is Mr Taylor's companion, he needs that dog.'' Cr Crichlow also called for a review of the dangerous dog laws. ``This law is wrong and it's flawed,'' she said. ``The american staffordshire terrier is so close-looking to the pit bull. You have to have pedigree papers, otherwise council officers can determine on a points system that it is a pit bull.'' Queensland Injury Surveillance Unit researcher Richard Hockey agreed Queensland's breed-specific dangerous dog laws were flawed. ``There is no scientific basis for properly identifying breeds and the laws have had no impact on attack statistics,'' he said. Gold Coast vet Jamie Mulcahy said dog breed identification was extremely difficult without proper DNA profiling. Dr Mulcahy said dogs should be identified as dangerous "through their deeds and not their breeds". (there is a photo as well, Fonzie is clearly a cross breed of some sort). l will keep you up to date on this case, next month is the court case. Anyone that can do this to a human being with such a dibillitating illness just disgust me. pitgal :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtnek Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 agreed, and that brings up a scary thought. What if someone decided Labs and Shepherds were "dangerous" dogs? Shepherds have crossed that line before, and been labeled as such. So what happens to the seeing eye dogs (many are labs, goldens and shepherds), and the police dogs, and the rescue dogs? do blind, deaf, and non-ambulatory people (like this gentleman) lose their assistance dogs? because somewhere else, a dog "like that" bit, injured or killed someone? BSL has to be stopped, for this reason alone.... absolute power corrupts absolutely..... :evil: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aroura Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 I usually don't read these types of posts, they just make me angry, upset and frustrated, but I did open this one for some reason, and it has made me feel or that and more. How dare they take his dog from him? What right do they have? If someone decided they didn't like the look of someone else, and shot them, they'd be jailed, possibly sentenced to death in some countries, or at the very least, be sent into a mental institute for life for being so crazy as to take the life of another. So whats the go? Someone sitting in their cushy mansion with their little foo foo dogs decides to pass a law that we can brutally kill other peoples pets just because we don't like the look of them? We're afraid of what they might do? What ever the reason, it sucks. Australian Cattle Dogs are the number one dog to bite someone, a lot of them even bite their family members, but do you see a ban on them? No, it's descrimination against bully breeds, they don't have the guts, nor the effort, to crack down on dog fighters, so they took the lazy way out and just banned the breed, so every single lover and owner of the breed is left heart broken, not to mention angry at the authorities, mentally scared for life.... and the rest. I wish that pay back would some day get them, but to wish for that is to wish for the innocent members of their family to die a brutal death, but I'm above that, I'm not that kind of person :evil: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imported_Kat Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Sounds dodgy this whole test that was designed... it doesn't actually state that the dog attacked... again another sickening case. :evil: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.