If that don't prove being banned from keeping animals

Doesn't work what will? Not got a link, but in the papers there is a article bout dog fighters who live between Witney and Burford, it involves two men, and their girlfriends, and one of the men was banned from keeping animals for ten years in 2005 because of fighting offences, the dogs were all underweight, and one died after eating its collar, the tip off was from vets, so at least one got vet treatment, but I was already a bit annoyed today, now Im full blown ****** off!

A ban does not work for several reasons, the main one is that it cannot be policed.

Bans for anything rarely work as the hundreds of drivers stopped by the police who have been disqualified from driving prove.

I've always known that bans don't work I mean I could be banned, but be living perfectly legally in a house with someone else who owns any number of animals, I think things like this really show that something needs looking at though.

Suggestions please.....................

some sort of register with spot checks could be a start, right now it seems their banned and forgotten bout, and more strict penalties, a longer prison sentence if caught breaking the ban, and also once the ban has passed still spot checks to make sure that if they aquire any animals that they are being cared for, with the guilty party having to pay a set amount each year to help fund it, and a ban from living in the same property as animals, over then pests like ants or bugs etc that are not brought in for a start

Sounds good on paper but........

Who is going to fund it?

• You cannot get offenders to fund it if they have no money to begin with (one of the main reasons fines do not work).
• Longer prison sentences would mean a bill to increase the current tariff.
• If you ban a person from where they live then you make them homeless and have another problem and then you need

to FUND and FIND accommodation to replace it.

So, as usual this idea would mean that the law abiding would be penalised as usual as where would all this money come from oh yes the taxpayer.

I am sure however that EVERYONE would be happy to do this as we all have such a lot of disposable income.

You don't have to hold their hands, should be the same as those who hurt kids, if you can't find suitable accomdation yourself you should become volunteer homeless, which means the council doesn't have to help you, will make spot checks harder, but Im sure theres ways to find out where people are already if their on benefits take it straight out there benefits before they get the money, same if there working, if their on benefits, if they make it hard or impossible to do the spot checks stop thier benefits, benefits can already be stopped for a certain amount of time for things already, if their working and cause the same problems fine em, basically make their lives as tough as possible, coz there is nothing real to make people stop and think right now, but if they risk a real prison sentence, having to pay yearly, and homelessness, then maybe those who hurt or worse innocents may think twice, or it may make it worse, but we can't just allow things to suffer coz we are making life too easy for them.

You cannot make yourself voluntarily homeless unless you make yourself voluntarily homeless ie you CHOOSE to leave the home you have.

I do not see anywhere in my post where I have suggested that anybody's hands be held.

Why is it when people identify the flaws in other people's arguments they are accused of somehow SUPPORTING offenders?

There are rules about what you can and cannot take from benefit money.

Again if you want to change the law on re why benefits can be stopped that will require a bill.

I cannot see anywhere where life is being "made" easy for them?

So what are YOU doing about this if you feel so strongly?

What peititons have YOU made to parliament?

What applications have YOU made to your MP?

What action group have YOU started?

What campaign are YOU behind?

For info - I think this is the link you are looking for.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...odthirsty.html

People like this should be shot in my opinon - that should solve the proplem

Anyway, since the original ban in 2005 the Animal Welfare Act of 2006 came into force, therefore more draconian powers are now available to the courts.

Under Section 8 of this act a prison sentence of up to 51 weeks and a fine of up to £20k.