Letter: Vexed question of dangerous dogs
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: I write to applaud the article on the Dangerous Dogs Act (26 October). Marina Cleland, the dog owner in your article, clearly acted in the spirit of the law by seeking advice from the appropriate authorities on what to do with her dog. Cases like hers illustrate the RSPCA's view that magistrates should be given discretion to allow owners of a dog ruled to be an American pit-bull terrier type to keep their pet and order late registration to comply with the law. Perhaps an amnesty allowing late registration would ease the current vexed situation.
Yours faithfully,
PETER DAVIES
Director General
RSPCA
West Sussex
26 October
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments