Microchips for Dogs - Good Idea or Not

[pdq1]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17797194

If the intention was to cut down on the number of savage attacks by all breeds of dog wouldn't a better solution be to have all dogs muzzled in public?

[LoftyLottie]

Why not muzzle and handcuff all humans too in view of the number of savage attacks by humans (more than the number of savage attacks by dogs).

I think microchipping all dogs is a very good idea.

[pdq1]

Except for blind dogs obviously many of which have been attacked by other dogs.

[ChuckFickens]

Do blind dogs have guide dogs?

[weecalf]

how do the get the box open

[woofgang]

I think that microchipping dogs is a good idea as it helps to reunite lost dogs with owners. Unless the dog is scanned at the point of attack,(hang on while I pull my pocket scanner out and scan the dog that is biting me???????) I can't see how it will help to identify the aggressive dog, let alone reduce aggressive dog incidents. I really cannot see how it can be enforced, people who get their dogs chipped will carry on doing so, people who don't won't.

[Stevee]

Its like any other, only the law abiding will do it.

Those who love, adore and dare I say it mollycoddle, will abide. Working dogs will abide.

Those who habitually break the law, mistreat or just don't give a damn on't comply. If it is enforced what would the fine be?

[pdq1]

Yes loftielottie but ownership of past dog attacks has never been in question. We want something to prevent an attack not look at children with 30 stitches in their wounds.

[Frank97]

I can't see it making any difference, the responsible owners will get their dogs chipped the irresponsible owners won't, just the same as with the dangerous dogs act.

[RATTER15]

Micro-chipping is a great thing but I'm not sure it will reduce attacks from dogs to any degree, I do think it should be compulsory though.. All ours are chipped.

[LoftyLottie]

For Chuck

http://photo.superlog...-dogs-seeing-eye-dog/

[LoftyLottie]

pdq. I just get very angry at the idea that ALL dogs be muzzled in public. Most attacks seem to be in the home or from dogs that are off the lead in public places. I would have no problem with a law that said all dogs should be on leads in public places - but not muzzled!!

[Prudie]

Microchipping is an excellent idea but the muzzling no. My impression is the majority of these horrific attacks don't happen in public but homes and gardens.

[LoftyLottie]

Snap Prudie.

[jackthehat]

It may help cut down on 'hybrid' dogs.
If breeders know that they *have* to take pups to a vet to get them chipped and that any diligent vet will be able to recognise (with the usual caveats) proscribed breeds, etc., these breeders/owners may be less likely to continue to produce potentially dangerous dogs.

If there is a correlating law that any unchipped dog 'may' be destroyed it would give the authorities greater latitude when dealing with the chavs and their devil dogs.

[woofgang]

But breeders won't "have" to do it. As I understand it, the requirement is going to be placed on owners and even if it isn't, the people with whom there is a problem may NEVER take the dog to the vet. They will whelp it themselves, doctor it themselves, do nothing and let the dog suffer or just kill it and get another one. Who is going to do "stop and scan? the police? (laughter)

[jackthehat]

If the Police have powers and cause to stop a dog/owner I presume there will be some electric wand that will be able to determine very quickly whether a dog is chipped, or not.

If the public can then be prevailed upon to 'only' purchase chipped animals then there ought to be a decrease in the number of 'attack-dogs'.

[pdq1]

The idea of microchiiping is flawed from the start. Besides the comments mentioned above that many dogs owners will not go to the bother this law only applies to new puppies. So the millions of dogs already in existance will remain chip free and the life of a dog could be 15 years. So quite a long time before the idea really kicks in.

[anotheoldgit]

An excellent idea, the chip should also contain a tracking device, which would help when a valuable has been missing or stolen.

Certain breeds of dogs should also have to hold a licence, and to gain one of these the owner would have to prove that there were perfect provisions to keep such a dog.

[woofgang]

you cant put a tracker in a chip. trackers need to transmit which requires a battery which requires increased size and regular replacement. Which breeds would you limit and what about crosses/mongrels?

yes you can carry a scanner (who will pay for them all?) they aren't foolproof. If the police have cause to stop a dog owner, they why do they need to scan the dog? surely there will already have been an incident? or are we travelling towards "well he looked shifty to me"?

[jackthehat]

An 'incident' doesn't necessarily constitute a toddler having his/her face chewed off. A scanner is a very portable piece of equipment and would take no room up in a vehicle suitable for transporting dogs.

Crosses and mongrels *of a certain type* are the very dogs I mean.......