Height Restriction For Dogs In Beijing Being Enforced.

[Kirislin]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/world/asia/beijing-police-seek-large-and-vicious-suspects-with-wet-noses.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130623&_r=2&

[Malakita]

That is incredibly heartbreaking for the poor owners!

I look at my two large breeds and know I would die if they were taken away so cruelly and worse , that they might possibly be for the meat trade.

Who are they to deem large breeds too big for city living?

It is too horrible !

[Kirislin]

Even a whippet would fail the height restrictions. Not only having them taken away would be bad enough, but their fate.................

[Jed]

The government caught - and beat to death many - the dogs in Beijing prior to the Olympics. Absolutely disgusting. It is very difficult not to buy anything made in China - and it wont make any difference to the Chinese gov anyhow, but it makes me feel better.8A$7ARDS

[Santo66]

The article says large dogs have been long banned in the city, yet they still get large dogs? Bit like the Pitbull scenario which have been a long restricted breed yet they still keep getting dogs who may resemble them and be subject to seizure or further restriction? Bit like the pissy driver who is only a little bit over they know they have had a drink, don't drive? Too many people sail on the edge of law and then blame everyone else when the wheels fall off when all of this could be avoided with some responsible forethought.

I do really feel for these people having their dogs seized, it's devastating to the point that I would never own a dog or breed subject to seizure or restriction. I recall years before the Victorian Pitbull fiasco, quite a few people had orders placed on dogs of Pitbull resemblance, although not seized, they had dangerous dog requirements placed, roofed enclosures, muzzles in public, striped collars etc. For years I had advocated when people spoke of getting BYB Bully breeds and crossbreeds to get a proper one papered from a registered breeder as there was always the Pitbull thing hanging in the balance to cause potential grief. No one by necessity needs a dog they can't identify what it is, we all have choices, some are informed choices, some are not

[Dame Aussie]

China is f*cked.

[Wobbly]

No one by necessity needs a dog they can't identify what it is, we all have choices, some are informed choices, some are not

No. You are wrong.

If your decision is to get a rescue dog, you can make an informed, well considered choice, but you will be unable to identify breed.

[Santo66]

No one by necessity needs a dog they can't identify what it is, we all have choices, some are informed choices, some are not

No. You are wrong.

If your decision is to get a rescue dog, you can make an informed, well considered choice, but you will be unable to identify breed.

Plenty of rescues don't look like restricted breeds is my point.

[huck house]

The article says large dogs have been long banned in the city, yet they still get large dogs? Bit like the Pitbull scenario which have been a long restricted breed yet they still keep getting dogs who may resemble them and be subject to seizure or further restriction? Bit like the pissy driver who is only a little bit over they know they have had a drink, don't drive? Too many people sail on the edge of law and then blame everyone else when the wheels fall off when all of this could be avoided with some responsible forethought.

I do really feel for these people having their dogs seized, it's devastating to the point that I would never own a dog or breed subject to seizure or restriction. I recall years before the Victorian Pitbull fiasco, quite a few people had orders placed on dogs of Pitbull resemblance, although not seized, they had dangerous dog requirements placed, roofed enclosures, muzzles in public, striped collars etc. For years I had advocated when people spoke of getting BYB Bully breeds and crossbreeds to get a proper one papered from a registered breeder as there was always the Pitbull thing hanging in the balance to cause potential grief. No one by necessity needs a dog they can't identify what it is, we all have choices, some are informed choices, some are not

'Bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny ' ... There are a multitude of reasons why this ^^^way of thinking and analogy is so wrong . Luckily , many will not capitulate to this disgusting betrayal of the canine species.

[Phyria]

The article says large dogs have been long banned in the city, yet they still get large dogs? Bit like the Pitbull scenario which have been a long restricted breed yet they still keep getting dogs who may resemble them and be subject to seizure or further restriction? Bit like the pissy driver who is only a little bit over they know they have had a drink, don't drive? Too many people sail on the edge of law and then blame everyone else when the wheels fall off when all of this could be avoided with some responsible forethought.

I do really feel for these people having their dogs seized, it's devastating to the point that I would never own a dog or breed subject to seizure or restriction. I recall years before the Victorian Pitbull fiasco, quite a few people had orders placed on dogs of Pitbull resemblance, although not seized, they had dangerous dog requirements placed, roofed enclosures, muzzles in public, striped collars etc. For years I had advocated when people spoke of getting BYB Bully breeds and crossbreeds to get a proper one papered from a registered breeder as there was always the Pitbull thing hanging in the balance to cause potential grief. No one by necessity needs a dog they can't identify what it is, we all have choices, some are informed choices, some are not

So a rescue dog that looks like a pit bull has less right to a happy forever home than other dogs? Regardless of temperment?

That sounds wrong to me.

What about cases like the old lady who's elderly bull terrier was kept from her because council officers said "I think it's a pit bull"

Some crosses may not have any restricted breed in them, but can still be mistaken for them.

I remember watching some footage from Britain (from the councils perspective) they'd been driving around to pick up some reported "pit bulls" this woman saw a guy playing with his dog in a church yard, walked up to him and said "your dog looks like a pit bull, I'm taking her now" and the poor guy had to let these strangers take his dog. He was devastated!

The dog looked like a lab x.

The saddest thing for me was all the dogs were all so happy to get in the van, I could just imagine them thinking "yay! Car ride!"

This is why legislation based on physical characteristics should be fought at every turn.

People in the article even say they thought the restriction had lapsed, they'd been allowed to register their large breed dogs!

[OSoSwift]

If I owned a large dog in that area I would get it humanely euthanased before it could get seized

[Santo66]

The article says large dogs have been long banned in the city, yet they still get large dogs? Bit like the Pitbull scenario which have been a long restricted breed yet they still keep getting dogs who may resemble them and be subject to seizure or further restriction? Bit like the pissy driver who is only a little bit over they know they have had a drink, don't drive? Too many people sail on the edge of law and then blame everyone else when the wheels fall off when all of this could be avoided with some responsible forethought.

I do really feel for these people having their dogs seized, it's devastating to the point that I would never own a dog or breed subject to seizure or restriction. I recall years before the Victorian Pitbull fiasco, quite a few people had orders placed on dogs of Pitbull resemblance, although not seized, they had dangerous dog requirements placed, roofed enclosures, muzzles in public, striped collars etc. For years I had advocated when people spoke of getting BYB Bully breeds and crossbreeds to get a proper one papered from a registered breeder as there was always the Pitbull thing hanging in the balance to cause potential grief. No one by necessity needs a dog they can't identify what it is, we all have choices, some are informed choices, some are not

So a rescue dog that looks like a pit bull has less right to a happy forever home than other dogs? Regardless of temperment?

That sounds wrong to me.

What about cases like the old lady who's elderly bull terrier was kept from her because council officers said "I think it's a pit bull"

Some crosses may not have any restricted breed in them, but can still be mistaken for them.

I remember watching some footage from Britain (from the councils perspective) they'd been driving around to pick up some reported "pit bulls" this woman saw a guy playing with his dog in a church yard, walked up to him and said "your dog looks like a pit bull, I'm taking her now" and the poor guy had to let these strangers take his dog. He was devastated!

The dog looked like a lab x.

The saddest thing for me was all the dogs were all so happy to get in the van, I could just imagine them thinking "yay! Car ride!"

This is why legislation based on physical characteristics should be fought at every turn.

People in the article even say they thought the restriction had lapsed, they'd been allowed to register their large breed dogs!

The legislation is WRONG I totally agree, but whilst the legislation is in place to continue acquiring dogs who resemble or could be mistaken for restricted breeds is an exercise vulnerable for potential devastation for the owners and the dogs is what I mean. The point I am making is that people can avoid potential devastation of the legislation by making better choices when selecting a new dog. It's obvious to me when legislation is in place that allows the seizure of dogs resembling restricted breeds, having a dog fitting the criteria that seizure could be the result of owning such a dog.

[Panto]

If I owned a large dog in that area I would get it humanely euthanased before it could get seized

or better yet, move. to somewhere where they are not restricted.

I'm wondering if a lot of them are tibetan mastiffs, being so popular with the chinese... (eta: unlikely, they're very expensive there)

Edited July 3, 2013 by Panto

[OSoSwift]

If I owned a large dog in that area I would get it humanely euthanased before it could get seized

or better yet, move. to somewhere where they are not restricted.

I'm wondering if a lot of them are tibetan mastiffs, being so popular with the chinese... (eta: unlikely, they're very expensive there)

Yep definitely move, but if not, no way would I let my dog get beaten to death