|
Location: B'ham (nr the airport)
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,963
|
|
Hi,
Very good thread. It's something I've often wondered myself but I doubt there's enough done to protect animals to be honest.
After all, for the police and/or RSPCA (or whoever brings the prosecution) to enforce such banning orders, they'd have to stay on top of things and both organisations would claim they don't have the resources to do spot checks.
Having said that, nationally how many such orders are in force at any one time? I don't beleive there are so many that either or both organisation would be overwhelmed by doing checks every couple of months.
Having been int he POlice I knwo how they work. There are some exceptional officers (in West Mids anyway) who work very hard. But there are just as many (not a minority by any means) who are lazy, power drunk and should never have the privilege or wearing a uniform. But as with everything, it takes only one bad publicity report to completely destroy a hard earned reputation.
With the RSCPA, since Yiannis was attacked last September, they didn't want to know. The police weren't interested either and I'm still waiting for info from both regarding my complaints int he way they DIDN'T handle what was a prosecution for both.
At the moment, I don't think much of either. I'm sure they could cope with the workload even though they say they couldn't, or wouldn't.
I suppose to an extent, if these people were banned from working with or having children in their company, checks are made. It's only because our animals are seen as personal posessions in law, IMO and not living, breathing beings with thoughts and feelings of their own, that they are treated differently.
Otherwise there would be an argument for anyone banned from keeping animals to be entered onto a register like the sex offenders register) where they have to go regularly to sign on sometimes, they have to let the relevant authorities know if they move house etc.
I can't forsee anything happening in the near though.
Laura xx