Dogs

Julia does a fair bit on dogs (less on cyclists of late) and I confess I don’t know a lot about the topic … what we’re meant to be against, whether they’re on leads etc.

Anyway, here’s Laura Perrins on the issue:

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/ban-the-owners-not-just-the-danger-dogs/

But the critical question is just why do people feel the need to own dogs that pose a risk to others? My guess is that the threat, the risk, is the point. This unspoken yet obvious threat is exactly the reason many people choose to own these and other menacing-looking dogs.

These owners are always the ones to tell you that their dogs are lovable furry creatures who ‘are always around their own children’ (poor kids). But we all know why you own them: it’s the implicit threat that gives you the thrill. Unfortunately for the rest of us, these people walk amongst us.

And their dogs are walking or running right beside them, often not even on leads.

My first thought is the same for other species which pose a significant threat - deathculters, illegals, those ones we’re not amount to mention but they’re in every bloody advert today … violent, to be avoided at all costs.

As for the dad avenging his daughter … article of faith, innit? Dad’s can exact whatever they wish from the perps. So what’s with this “pardon” bullsh?