Dangerous Dogs Act - Trinidad and Tobago

[MaxPower]

The dog still alive?

In what state? I hope it’s not suffering.

Where are the Animal Rights activists?

Its unfortunate the death of the girl, but it wasn’t the dog’s fault.

The owner must feel the FULL brunt of the law.

[j.o.e]

I’m a dog lover but put it down. It’s a dog and no one can guarantee that it won’t kill again … we are certain of what it’s capable of. Put it down.
Even if the owner is at fault it doesn’t change the fact that the dog is currently dangerous.

[hover11]

When will they learn

[RedVEVO]

"Kenjo"]Just read this . Like that family is different. They even have other dogs so I don’t understand what would have been the hesitation to put this one down[/quote]

The TTPS is lacks with the Dangerous Dog Act .

Destroy ALL dangerous dogs - conform to the Act and stop the murders

[RedVEVO]

I’m a dog lover but put it down. It’s a dog and no one can guarantee that it won’t kill again … we are certain of what it’s capable of. Put it down.
Even if the owner is at fault it doesn’t change the fact that the dog is currently dangerous.

Those dogs are murderers - destroy ALL Dangerous Dogs NOW !
In any other country the owners of such dogs would of been charged with manslaughter .

Again we have the T&T laws but failed implementation as usual .

T&T needs to bring back Faris as Attorney General .

[maj. tom]

NSFW NSFL WTF
Don't be watching this on your work server!
Don't blame anybody when the work admin seize your computer to check your history.

Both animals have to be put down, one due to fatal trauma and the other because he is an out of control nasty mc!!!

https://i.imgur.com/p74u7RE.mp4

phpBB [media]

[hover11]

Owner of killer dog in police custody


https://trinidadexpress.com/news/local/ ... ium=social

Hope the parent takes them to civil court as well it may not get back his daughter but ppl have to understand negligence has consequences

[MaxPower]

Charge them for manslaughter and animal cruelty.

I want them feel the FULL brunt of the law and an example made out of them for all the other irresponsible Trinis.

[hover11]

Charge them for manslaughter and animal cruelty.

I want them feel the FULL brunt of the law and an example made out of them for all the other irresponsible Trinis.

X10000

[88sins]

Charge them for manslaughter and animal cruelty.

I want them feel the FULL brunt of the law and an example made out of them for all the other irresponsible Trinis.

X10000

Cool, gtk that's allyuh perspectives.
Just 2 quick question tho.


1-When ppl start to abandon these bully breeds all over the place enmasse, who allyuh gonna charge if those animals form packs and maul someone? Because when they proclaimed the act, plenty people abandoned dogs all over the place, and since they are social animals it's not far fetched to think that they will form groups, with stray mongrels and even other bullies.

2-When the irresponsible ones decide to switch breeds and you suddenly see a setta shepherds, akitas, mals, rotties, etc causing the same problem the bully breeds were blamed for, then what? Keep in mind if you add them to the list of dangerous breeds, these ppl gonna keep switching to some other breed, and the problem will continue in perpetuity. Eventually you will have to get a permit to keep a pet cockroach.
Is a slippery slope, and we walking it in soapy rubber slippers.
Just wanted to get you both opinions.

Anyway.




if they do charge the owner, I doubt it will be for noncompliance with the act regarding registration, or failing to have insurance against the animals possibly harming or killing someone. The government has nowhere doing registration, so that charge relatively easy to beat, and the insurance sector ain't want to touch that with a 40' pole.
He will probably be charged with failure to secure the animal in accordance with the act for a start, but not likely manslaughter as it doesn't exactly fall within the lawful definition. But that charge and all have plenty wiggle room in this case. If he's convicted though, that charge alone is enough to cost him more than a little trouble.


We will all have to wait and see how it eventually plays out.
Hopefully the population in general takes this at least as a learning opportunity if nothing else.

[paid_influencer]

i say we let the owner be mauled to death

seems fair, no?

[88sins]

i say we let the owner be mauled to death

seems fair, no?

I surmise many people may agree with you, and just as many may not.

[paid_influencer]

is it fair tho

[88sins]

is it fair tho

Maybe, maybe not.
I leave that up to society at large and the judicial process to decide.

[MaxPower]

Charge them for manslaughter and animal cruelty.

I want them feel the FULL brunt of the law and an example made out of them for all the other irresponsible Trinis.

X10000

Cool, gtk that's allyuh perspectives.
Just 2 quick question tho.


1-When ppl start to abandon these bully breeds all over the place enmasse, who allyuh gonna charge if those animals form packs and maul someone? Because when they proclaimed the act, plenty people abandoned dogs all over the place, and since they are social animals it's not far fetched to think that they will form groups, with stray mongrels and even other bullies.

2-When the irresponsible ones decide to switch breeds and you suddenly see a setta shepherds, akitas, mals, rotties, etc causing the same problem the bully breeds were blamed for, then what? Keep in mind if you add them to the list of dangerous breeds, these ppl gonna keep switching to some other breed, and the problem will continue in perpetuity. Eventually you will have to get a permit to keep a pet cockroach.
Is a slippery slope, and we walking it in soapy rubber slippers.
Just wanted to get you both opinions.

Anyway.

8,

1. Cannot charge anyone if you don’t know the owners. Unfortunately, if people are mauled the
dogs will be put down, but its not going to be a daily rampage. A few mauls and things will be put in place and the public on high alert until the situation is controlled. But as you said, when the act was enacted, people abandoned dogs and there wasn’t any mauling therefore i do no foresee future mauling. I think generally we are doing ok with the amount of dangerous dogs we have, its just the few jackasses that are making it bad for all.

2. Getting a permit for a “pet cockroach” is what we need if people want to continue their irresponsible behavior. The main issue we have is the neglect for our animals.

[rollingstock]

i say we let the owner be mauled to death

seems fair, no?

Why? Was his dog loose in public?

I don't want to sound insensitive cause a child loss her life and nothing can replace that.

Why are we not focusing on the parent that left these children unattended.

Fyi the dog is still alive, I had an interaction with it, doesn't hit me as a cold blooded killer.

[kerwinishere]

i say we let the owner be mauled to death

seems fair, no?

Why? Was his dog loose in public?

I don't want to sound insensitive cause a child loss her life and nothing can replace that.

Why are we not focusing on the parent that left these children unattended.

Fyi the dog is still alive, I had an interaction with it, doesn't hit me as a cold blooded killer.

I could be wrong but doesn't the owner of the reside of the same premises the incident took place, meaning the dog wasn't left to roam "in public"?

Irresponsible owner(s) nonetheless but I feel like most people seem to lose all common sense when it comes to matters like these. The children shouldn't have been left unsupervised and the dog should have been properly trained and secured by the owner IF they knew that the children were going to be present.

[paid_influencer]

owner should have done those things but didn't

now there needs to be consequences, including punishment in kind

[88sins]

Was the owner on the property or not when the incident occurred?
Was the dog secured immediately prior to the incident, and if it was, how did it get loose to cause the incident?
Were there any indicators prior to the incident that suggested that the animal was potentially a danger to the children? And did the children or their parents or the owner know that the dog was a potential danger to the children? If there was and they did, why were the children left unsupervised with the animal in the immediate vicinity?
Did the dog attack the victim on or off the owners property?
Did the victim reside there or was she an invited or uninvited guest?
If she did not live in the same houshold, did the owner of the dog know that the victim was there or not?
Who was there/supposed to be to supervise and safeguard the children? If nobody was there, why were they not there? If they were there, why did they fail to provide proper supervision and protection for the victim that resulted in the death of the victim?
Was the animal trained or intentionally conditioned to act aggressively and/or attack humans on command or by observing a specific action or behavior?

These are some of the questions that are going to have to be answered.

[timelapse]

Was the owner on the property or not when the incident occurred?
Was the dog secured immediately prior to the incident, and if it was, how did it get loose to cause the incident?
Were there any indicators prior to the incident that suggested that the animal was potentially a danger to the children? And did the children or their parents or the owner know that the dog was a potential danger to the children? If there was and they did, why were the children left unsupervised with the animal in the immediate vicinity?
Did the dog attack the victim on or off the owners property?
Did the victim reside there or was she an invited or uninvited guest?
If she did not live in the same houshold, did the owner of the dog know that the victim was there or not?
Who was there/supposed to be to supervise and safeguard the children? If nobody was there, why were they not there? If they were there, why did they fail to provide proper supervision and protection for the victim that resulted in the death of the victim?
Was the animal trained or intentionally conditioned to act aggressively and/or attack humans on command or by observing a specific action or behavior?

These are some of the questions that are going to have to be answered.

Dem don't want to ask that.Kill the dog, problem solved in their mind

[paid_influencer]

Was the owner on the property or not when the incident occurred?
Was the dog secured immediately prior to the incident, and if it was, how did it get loose to cause the incident?
Were there any indicators prior to the incident that suggested that the animal was potentially a danger to the children? And did the children or their parents or the owner know that the dog was a potential danger to the children? If there was and they did, why were the children left unsupervised with the animal in the immediate vicinity?
Did the dog attack the victim on or off the owners property?
Did the victim reside there or was she an invited or uninvited guest?
If she did not live in the same houshold, did the owner of the dog know that the victim was there or not?
Who was there/supposed to be to supervise and safeguard the children? If nobody was there, why were they not there? If they were there, why did they fail to provide proper supervision and protection for the victim that resulted in the death of the victim?
Was the animal trained or intentionally conditioned to act aggressively and/or attack humans on command or by observing a specific action or behavior?

These are some of the questions that are going to have to be answered.

ALL of those things are the owner's responsibility to prevent from happening. ALL

If the owner cannot make those assurances, he should not have gotten a controlled breed.

Owner needs to face consequences or this will continue and more children will die

[MaxPower]

Its time to make an example out of irresponsible dog owners.

[88sins]

Was the owner on the property or not when the incident occurred?
Was the dog secured immediately prior to the incident, and if it was, how did it get loose to cause the incident?
Were there any indicators prior to the incident that suggested that the animal was potentially a danger to the children? And did the children or their parents or the owner know that the dog was a potential danger to the children? If there was and they did, why were the children left unsupervised with the animal in the immediate vicinity?
Did the dog attack the victim on or off the owners property?
Did the victim reside there or was she an invited or uninvited guest?
If she did not live in the same houshold, did the owner of the dog know that the victim was there or not?
Who was there/supposed to be to supervise and safeguard the children? If nobody was there, why were they not there? If they were there, why did they fail to provide proper supervision and protection for the victim that resulted in the death of the victim?
Was the animal trained or intentionally conditioned to act aggressively and/or attack humans on command or by observing a specific action or behavior?

These are some of the questions that are going to have to be answered.

ALL of those things are the owner's responsibility to prevent from happening. ALL

If the owner cannot make those assurances, he should not have gotten a controlled breed.

Owner needs to face consequences or this will continue and more children will die

So, lemme see if I got your loony logic right.

If a man secured his house, and his pet, but if someone that doesn't live there places themselves within the confines of his property and said pet damage/kill them, the animal owner is still responsible.
Excellent.


So, by your own reasoning,, when a random relative of yours come on your property, unsupervised and unbeknownst to you since you not home, and your large pothound buss the chain it tied with and proceeds to kill said relative, you responsible fot that too ent?
And please, bring a better argument than "a pothound is not a controlled dangerous dog" and "a pothound can't kill nobody".
You starting to realize the insanity of your response?


The authorities alone will have to figure out all the details and specifics of the case that led up to what happened, and proceed from there in whatever direction in the interest of justice, not knee-jerk emotional reactivity. All responsible and irresponsible persons should be held accountable in this, not just the dog and the owner, but also whoever was supposed to be there with those children and failed to keep them safe.

[paid_influencer]

why d rass you calling it a pet? you so dotish you don't realize that is in no way a pet? it is a dangerous animal, even defined in law as such. you hadda be dotish or willfully cruntish to calling that a pet.

if you, for whatever god damn reason, want to keep that animal on your premises, you are responsible for it. there is no divine right to keep an animal like that on your premises. WE allow YOU to keep that animal under the condition you are responsible for it and all its actions. If it kill somebody, YOU are responsible for that.

If you not comfortable with that, do not have that animal on your premises. simple. it real basic. even dotish people who think that animal is a pet could understand that

[rollingstock]

Wolf not named in the dangerous dog act.

Nice, I can have that as a pet. Gonna name him fluffy Luffy foo foo

[timelapse]

Wolf not named in the dangerous dog act.

Nice, I can have that as a pet. Gonna name him fluffy Luffy foo foo

Paid is clearly a cat person

[DMan7]

Dangerous Dogs Act not Dangerous Canine Act. No you cannot get a Wolf.

[88sins]

why d rass you calling it a pet? you so dotish you don't realize that is in no way a pet? it is a dangerous animal, even defined in law as such. you hadda be dotish or willfully cruntish to calling that a pet.

if you, for whatever god damn reason, want to keep that animal on your premises, you are responsible for it. there is no divine right to keep an animal like that on your premises. WE allow YOU to keep that animal under the condition you are responsible for it and all its actions. If it kill somebody, YOU are responsible for that.

If you not comfortable with that, do not have that animal on your premises. simple. it real basic. even dotish people who think that animal is a pet could understand that

Boi, I don't know what else to say about you with this post, other than your head like it serves no other purpose than to be a hat rack. And it looking like it can barely even serve that purpose.
If you ever were a paid influencer as you call yourself, I suspect you were paid in rat farts, because your influence thus far has been proven to be only as far as the distance from your eyeballs to the tip of your nose.


You need to calm down, and hire magic mist to clean the cobwebs and dust out from between your ears every now and then.
They don't take payment in rat farts tho

[maj. tom]

Can the police adopt the dog and train him as a K9 officer? Since it's a very intelligent dog and bred to be a working dog.

[88sins]

Legally they can't