In defence of ‘devil dogs’

6 March 2010

/article_images/articledir_11626/5813498/1_listing.jpg

The proposed competence test for dog owners is designed to stop hoodies owning pit bulls, says Brendan O’Neill. But are the dogs, or their owners, really that dangerous?

Some people call them ‘dangerous dogs’. The tabloids prefer ‘devil dogs’. The police refer to them as ‘status dogs’. The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals labels them ‘antisocial dogs’ (which is the most bizarre name of all. Since when were dogs expected to obey social etiquette?).

Whatever they’re called, these dogs, monsters, beasts are never out of the news. Whether it’s the pit bull terrier, the Japanese tosa, the dogo Argentina or the fila Brasileiro — all fearsome-looking creatures, and all subject to strict ownership rules under the Dangerous Dogs Act of 1991 — barely a week goes by without one of these big-shouldered, wild-jawed canine crazies staring at us from the pages of the papers next to a report about how they are terrorising communities, mauling postmen, or being used as weapons by drug dealers gutted that they can no longer carry knives. But look behind the headlines and it becomes increasingly clear that the media and political fear of these beasts is out of all proportion to how dangerous they are. Rather ‘dangerous dogs’ has become code for ‘dangerous underclass’.

In an effort to curb the number of ‘dangerous dogs’, this week the government proposed introducing a competence test for all dog-owners. Clearly desperate to squeeze through one more piece of patronising legislation before facing possible public extermination at the polls, the government wants all existing and potential dog owners to undergo a series of tests (of the ‘Walkies! Sit!’ variety?), to have to pay third-party insurance in case their pet attacks someone, and to install a microchip in their dogs’ necks containing the owner’s name and address. The aim, as the Daily Mail correctly surmised, is not only to bring dog-owners into that very big tent of People Continually Spied On By The Authorities, but to weed out the ‘devil dogs that terrorise socially deprived areas’ by controlling the kind of people who are allowed to own such dogs.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next page