Pets are being Mistreated in Rented House

steampowered

This thread demonstrates perfectly why the RSPCA is in an impossible position. 

On the one hand, you have people saying why they don't immediately break into the case and seize the animals. And then complaining why they don't bring more prosecutions.

On the other hand, you have people accusing them of being out of control. And saying they have have too much power.

It's a pile of nonsense. It's easy to sit in an armchair and sling mud at a charity doing its best to resolve a very difficult problem. The RSPCA does its best with limited resources and limited powers. It cannot just run around seizing animals willy nilly; nor can it solve every ill in the world; nor can it magically create homes for pets when there are not enough. Just like every other charity it does its best with the resources it has got.

steampowered

CJDogsbody said:

 The Animal Welfare Act 2006 empowered the police and a local authority (if the latter has created inspector under the act).  They have wide ranging powers.  They prefer to leave enforcement to a charity bringing private prosecutions.  Now think about how the post office abused that power.  

Go and look at the Wooler report and the Justice Committee report on private prosecutions.  It is adisgrace that criminal law is being policed by a charity which has its own agenda.  Remember that the RSPCA was forced by the Charity Commission to change its governance and back in the seventies told by them that if it dod not withdraw from the charter on Animal Rights it would lose its charity status.  The RSPCA preferred the cash benefits of being a charity but did not change its spots.

Well maybe if local authorities and the police did their jobs and took animal cruelty seriously, the RSPCA wouldn't be needed? That's not a reason to criticise the RSPCA. 

Not that I blame local authorities and police mind. Their budgets have been slashed so they need to prioritise too.

CJDogsbody

steampowered said:

This thread demonstrates perfectly why the RSPCA is in an impossible position. 

On the one hand, you have people saying why they don't immediately break into the case and seize the animals. And then complaining why they don't bring more prosecutions.

On the other hand, you have people accusing them of being out of control. And saying they have have too much power.

It's a pile of nonsense. It's easy to sit in an armchair and sling mud at a charity doing its best to resolve a very difficult problem. The RSPCA does its best with limited resources and limited powers. It cannot just run around seizing animals willy nilly; nor can it solve every ill in the world; nor can it magically create homes for pets when there are not enough. Just like every other charity it does its best with the resources it has got.

In actual fact the RSPCA have no power.  They have no different powers or rights from any other member of the public.  The power they appear to have comes from being very rich and using the powers that were given to others.

The legislation that the RSPCA promoted, the Dangerous Dogs Act, which it used to condemn many family pets to death, the new anti-stance is recent. The legislation that has driven dog breeding out of this country so that dogs are now imported on dodgy paperwork, often by charities, because it made it impossible form many breeders to continue.  

CJDogsbody

steampowered said:

CJDogsbody said:

 The Animal Welfare Act 2006 empowered the police and a local authority (if the latter has created inspector under the act).  They have wide ranging powers.  They prefer to leave enforcement to a charity bringing private prosecutions.  Now think about how the post office abused that power.  

Go and look at the Wooler report and the Justice Committee report on private prosecutions.  It is adisgrace that criminal law is being policed by a charity which has its own agenda.  Remember that the RSPCA was forced by the Charity Commission to change its governance and back in the seventies told by them that if it dod not withdraw from the charter on Animal Rights it would lose its charity status.  The RSPCA preferred the cash benefits of being a charity but did not change its spots.

Well maybe if local authorities and the police did their jobs and took animal cruelty seriously, the RSPCA wouldn't be needed? That's not a reason to criticise the RSPCA. 

Not that I blame local authorities and police mind. Their budgets have been slashed so they need to prioritise too.

steampowered said:

CJDogsbody said:

 The Animal Welfare Act 2006 empowered the police and a local authority (if the latter has created inspector under the act).  They have wide ranging powers.  They prefer to leave enforcement to a charity bringing private prosecutions.  Now think about how the post office abused that power.  

Go and look at the Wooler report and the Justice Committee report on private prosecutions.  It is adisgrace that criminal law is being policed by a charity which has its own agenda.  Remember that the RSPCA was forced by the Charity Commission to change its governance and back in the seventies told by them that if it dod not withdraw from the charter on Animal Rights it would lose its charity status.  The RSPCA preferred the cash benefits of being a charity but did not change its spots.

Well maybe if local authorities and the police did their jobs and took animal cruelty seriously, the RSPCA wouldn't be needed? That's not a reason to criticise the RSPCA. 

Not that I blame local authorities and police mind. Their budgets have been slashed so they need to prioritise too.

LAs and police are both regulated and have proper complaints procedures if they fail to do their jobs properly.  Unless people used them and insist that t hey stop shrugging their responsibilities off to an unregulated charity (RSPCA complaints procedure in internal and culminates in someone paid by RSPCA) nothing will change.  

When the RSPCA fails to do the job it claims for itself leaving animals to suffer then of course it is right to criticise them.  

elsien

CJDogsbody said:

steampowered said:

This thread demonstrates perfectly why the RSPCA is in an impossible position. 

On the one hand, you have people saying why they don't immediately break into the case and seize the animals. And then complaining why they don't bring more prosecutions.

On the other hand, you have people accusing them of being out of control. And saying they have have too much power.

It's a pile of nonsense. It's easy to sit in an armchair and sling mud at a charity doing its best to resolve a very difficult problem. The RSPCA does its best with limited resources and limited powers. It cannot just run around seizing animals willy nilly; nor can it solve every ill in the world; nor can it magically create homes for pets when there are not enough. Just like every other charity it does its best with the resources it has got.

In actual fact the RSPCA have no power.  They have no different powers or rights from any other member of the public.  The power they appear to have comes from being very rich and using the powers that were given to others.

The legislation that the RSPCA promoted, the Dangerous Dogs Act, which it used to condemn many family pets to death, the new anti-stance is recent. The legislation that has driven dog breeding out of this country so that dogs are now imported on dodgy paperwork, often by charities, because it made it impossible form many breeders to continue.  

I don't recall the RSPCA pushing for the DDA? If I recall correctly it was a governmental knee jerk reaction to two dog attacks and a spot of media hysteria. 

TheJP

I think this thread is becoming a RSPCA bashing topic. Think its best to draw the line on this, if you feel passionately about this i suggest an appropriate forum or you can volunteer to spend a shift with my wife to see what its like. 

GDB2222

It's interesting how worked up people are about two dogs cooped up, but nobody has mentioned the millions of battery hens around. 

CJDogsbody

elsien said:

CJDogsbody said:

steampowered said:

This thread demonstrates perfectly why the RSPCA is in an impossible position. 

On the one hand, you have people saying why they don't immediately break into the case and seize the animals. And then complaining why they don't bring more prosecutions.

On the other hand, you have people accusing them of being out of control. And saying they have have too much power.

It's a pile of nonsense. It's easy to sit in an armchair and sling mud at a charity doing its best to resolve a very difficult problem. The RSPCA does its best with limited resources and limited powers. It cannot just run around seizing animals willy nilly; nor can it solve every ill in the world; nor can it magically create homes for pets when there are not enough. Just like every other charity it does its best with the resources it has got.

In actual fact the RSPCA have no power.  They have no different powers or rights from any other member of the public.  The power they appear to have comes from being very rich and using the powers that were given to others.

The legislation that the RSPCA promoted, the Dangerous Dogs Act, which it used to condemn many family pets to death, the new anti-stance is recent. The legislation that has driven dog breeding out of this country so that dogs are now imported on dodgy paperwork, often by charities, because it made it impossible form many breeders to continue.  

I don't recall the RSPCA pushing for the DDA? If I recall correctly it was a governmental knee jerk reaction to two dog attacks and a spot of media hysteria. 

They even went on chat shows at the time.  And when it was passed they used an inspector called Jan Eachus to identify and condemn dogs to death.  They are a charity.  They didn't need to be involved.  But they chose to destroy families who loved their dogs using the laws they had campaigned for to do so.

sheramber

and please don't say that they need a warrant because they have been known to go to neighbours and ask to look over the fence or even borrow  ladder to do so.

What was said was that they required a warrant to seize animals.

Which you agree with here

Once they have seen anything they can go to the police and ask them to get a warrant.

steampowered

CJDogsbody said:

In actual fact the RSPCA have no power.  They have no different powers or rights from any other member of the public.  The power they appear to have comes from being very rich and using the powers that were given to others.

The legislation that the RSPCA promoted, the Dangerous Dogs Act, which it used to condemn many family pets to death, the new anti-stance is recent. The legislation that has driven dog breeding out of this country so that dogs are now imported on dodgy paperwork, often by charities, because it made it impossible form many breeders to continue.  

If the RSPCA have no power, then what on earth are you complaining about?

If the police and LAs are not doing their job, take it up with them. 

I for one am very glad that breeders find it more difficult to breed dangerous dogs, given the massive harm which they cause. And the enormous number of unwanted Staffies sitting in RSCPA adoption centres with no homes to go to. I went to an RSCPA adoption centre a few weeks ago and it was mostly just unwanted Staffies, unfortunately, as people didn't want to adopt them.