Foxgun Tom 75 Posted May 8, 2007 Report Share Posted May 8, 2007 (edited) My latest Scottish Association for Countrysports magazine dropped through the letter-box this mornining included inside was the following article: It looks as if we!! at SAC's got a result Tom What is a ‘dangerous dog’, and what is the connection with country sports? Well, dogs, as a whole, are an integral part of country sports – from the placid retriever to our enthusiastic little terriers. They have all been carefully bred to perform a particular job for us, and most of these duties are carried out in the countryside. Some breeds, such as the Scottish deerhound, are now legally redundant, although still much-loved, due to changes in the law which make their original purpose unlawful. Bull terriers, too, are no longer used to distract (or otherwise!) bulls – does this mean that the breeds should die out? Of course it doesn’t! For centuries, man has devised wonderful alternative uses for breeds where the original purpose is no longer required. We have dog shows, terrier racing, guide dogs, hearing dogs, drug sniffers – the list goes on forever. At the turn of the year, there was a horrific incident, where a young child was savaged by some kind of bull terriers – seemingly Pit Bulls. This led to a huge backlash against the owners of all bull terrier breeds, right across the country. Understandable, perhaps, but there was more to it than appeared on the surface. It seems that some Authorities, and some of the animal charities, had a plan already in place to launch a campaign against owners of these dogs, and used this incident as justification for doing so. Whether their campaigns were justified for any reason is doubtful, but for them to use such a horrific incident in such a cynical way is just contemptible. Before we go any further, it should be made crystal clear to all that SACS will not condone any illegal activity. The clear implication of the vendetta against bull terriers is that they are being widely used for dog-fighting, and we firmly believe that this is completely misplaced. The vast majority of these great little dogs are pets. While dog-fighting does undoubtedly still take place in certain areas, it is completely unfair and unreasonable for police or animal charities to force their way into ordinary homes and take pet dogs on ‘suspicion’ of something or other. The heartbreak this causes dog owners is desperate, and because of the badly-worded legislation on ‘Dangerous Dogs’, the burden of proof is put on the owner to prove that the dog is not of an illegal type. This puts a huge strain on the ordinary owner, who does not have experienced legal advice available, and who in many cases would not be able to afford it, even if it was available. Fortunately, our SACS insurance policy covers both public liability and legal fees for all breeds, and Dangerous Dog legislation is covered under our legal fees insurance, so we were able to provide comfort for large numbers of bull and other terrier owners throughout the country. In fact, the first insurance claim is already under way – for a member who had four pet dogs forcibly removed after an anonymous call to the authorities. Our view is that there are very few intrinsically ‘dangerous dogs’, and that problems are far more likely to be caused by inappropriate behaviour by certain owners. On the basis that anyone who is against our enemies is a friend, we are happy to support all country-related sports, including the keeping of all breeds of dog, provided that owners are keeping and using them for lawful purposes. [sTOP PRESS: THE DAY BEFORE THIS ISSUE WENT TO PRESS, THE FOUR DOGS WERE RETURNED TO THEIR OWNER AND HIS LEGAL EXPENSES WILL BE PAID BY OUR INSURANCE COMPANY. RESULT!] Edited May 8, 2007 by Foxgun Tom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ditch_Shitter Posted May 8, 2007 Report Share Posted May 8, 2007 Reading that made me feel Good, Tom! Sounds like ye have an organisation there that's ready and willing to look after The Lads, rather than just pander to the Lords! Good on ye! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ricky-N.p.p 0 Posted May 8, 2007 Report Share Posted May 8, 2007 nice to see fellow members getting what they pay for Tom....peice of mind !!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest SJM Posted May 8, 2007 Report Share Posted May 8, 2007 Enjoyed reading that Tom it is a well written article Pleased to hear the owner got their dogs back too Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Foxgun Tom 75 Posted May 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 8, 2007 The SCOTTISH ASSOCIATION FOR COUNTRYSPORTS members magazine is now online as!! is the original article click on the link below Tom http://www.sacs.org.uk/Sacs/Current%20Magazine.pdf Quote Link to post Share on other sites
polecat 1 Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 check it out before yous part with your money ????????????? what they will do for you ??????????? as i was a member and was done under dangerous dogs act 1971 and had to defend myself its like they say fools and there money are easily parted just check it out thats all i,m saying Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Foxgun Tom 75 Posted May 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 Poley can you give us the full details?? why where you charged (what where the circumstances of the offence's) why did you have to defend yourself Did Sac's refuse to defend you and what was the reason?? Over the last few years I've helped promote Sac's and tell new members the bebefits of the organisation, give the members of the forum the full story and I'll get a full and honest version of events from the Scottish Association Tom PS: Is it !!just the case "you were got caught banged to right and had no defence?? I don't know because I don't know the reason But!! I'll feckin find out check it out before yous part with your money ????????????? what they will do for you ??????????? as i was a member and was done under dangerous dogs act 1971 and had to defend myself its like they say fools and there money are easily parted just check it out thats all i,m saying Quote Link to post Share on other sites
polecat 1 Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 you know the story ??????????? and i wasn,t done bang to rights i was on my own permission legal and it was a bite for a bite case involving my bullx pup and i was told that i was not covered as a member of s a c spoke to our lawyer a mr cruickshanks in abeerden told that i wasnt covered by sacs so that is why i,m telling everybody to ????????????? what cover they get from sacs and yes i was found guilty of dangerous dogs act 1971 at kilmarnock sheriff court so can you give me the poeple on forum the leagal cover that they get for being an owner of a bull or bullx cross if and when they get charged under the dangerous dogs act 1971 act scotland remember laws change over the borders ??????????????????? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Foxgun Tom 75 Posted May 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 I Know there was a story. I don't know what the full story was?? or is!!I also don't understand what you mean for a bite for a bite case?? When was the incident? and what where the circumstances?? what where the reasons given for you not being covered by Sac's insurance?? Why exactly where you found guilty and what where you accused off?? Was Ian Clark the Director of Sac's at the time . I spoke to Ian Clark, the Director of SACS, this morning, and he confirmed that the SACS Insurance specifically covers legal defence against charges under Wildlife and Countryside legislation. This includes alleged offences relating to badgers, and all valid members are fully covered by this insurance. It also includes legal defence against charges under the Dangerous Dogs laws. Tom you know the story ??????????? and i wasn,t done bang to rights i was on my own permission legal and it was a bite for a bite case involving my bullx pup and i was told that i was not covered as a member of s a c spoke to our lawyer a mr cruickshanks in abeerden told that i wasnt covered by sacs so that is why i,m telling everybody to ????????????? what cover they get from sacs and yes i was found guilty of dangerous dogs act 1971 at kilmarnock sheriff court so can you give me the poeple on forum the leagal cover that they get for being an owner of a bull or bullx cross if and when they get charged under the dangerous dogs act 1971 act scotland remember laws change over the borders ??????????????????? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
polecat 1 Posted May 10, 2007 Report Share Posted May 10, 2007 yes ian was the boss and i was covered by sacs 2 mts after i was a member i was walking my dogs on my permision when an other guy entered with an other dog his dog had a go a my old bitch then it turned on my pup in the melee the pup killed his dog then the guy sent for police and i was charged with being the owner of a pit bull acorroding to the dead dogs owner but i took my 3 dogs down to the local cop shop and low and behold the cops said where is the pit bull that killed the dog i told him its the little pup that you are clapping so then the charges i was done for having a dangerous dog ie my lurcher pup 8 mts old at the time so cops told me it would be a bite for a bite case when it came too court as my pup and old bitch had severel puncture wounds to there faces but low and behold when it came to court it was only me and my pup that had been charged ( in between this happing i contacted sacs and i was told that i was not covered for court case ) but wqas given tom cruicshanks number the lawyer for sacs @ gorgeo mathers in aberdeen he told me to get a local lawyer as i was not covered by my( sacs membership ) so being the stuborn little git that i am i went to court and defened my self as i could not get legal aid for such a case at end of the day was found guilty and i now have a conviction for dangerous dogs so if you cant see where i am coming from when telling new folk to check that they are covered then i dont know and by the way this conviction has stop my f a c application now ??????????? look forward to your reply oh and bye the way be fore this happened i was telling everybody to join sacs in scotland wales ireland and england as well as i judge a lot of lurcher shows about britian so dont think i,m doing this out of malaice as i,m not that type of guy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bill88 6 Posted May 10, 2007 Report Share Posted May 10, 2007 Sounds like you were well and truly shafted there Polecat,and as you say the shite stick's cos it's put the clamper on yer fac. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
polecat 1 Posted May 10, 2007 Report Share Posted May 10, 2007 i know as was told keep out of trouble for cpl years and they would grant me f a c but then this happened and i,m f****d again so thats why i,m miffed with this sacs stuff as we relay need make sure that yous are covered me i,m no longer a member s a c s as you will understand why they just like country side alliance give us your cash and that will be nice thank you Quote Link to post Share on other sites
polecat 1 Posted May 10, 2007 Report Share Posted May 10, 2007 fox gun as a respected member of the the lurcher world i,ve have to ask this question do you represent honisty ,integrity and would you stand firm loyal 2 true freinds ????????????? that was asked on behalf of an old freind of mine from yorkshire ????????????????? dont shooti,m jusy messanger Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Foxgun Tom 75 Posted May 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2007 (edited) You would be better off asking other peoples opinions regarding my honesty or integrity, you know me!! what do you think?? I don't represent anyone but myself!! Why ask the question, and whose the friend?? It all sounds pretty cryptic?? Regarding the original post!! I'll get Ian Clark the Director of SAC's to respond and I'll ask Tom Cruikshank (SAC'S Legal Advisor) if he'll respond and!! what the legal posistion was in this case Can you confirm that the owner of the dog that died!! took ill and suffered a heart attack at the same incident If the incident happened more than a year ago?? I can confirm that Ian Clark was not "the Boss" of the Scottish Association for Countrysports he!! did not take up his posistion as Director until last year!! David Cant may have been Director (Boss) at the time Tom fox gun as a respected member of the the lurcher world i,ve have to ask this question do you represent honisty ,integrity and would you stand firm loyal 2 true freinds ????????????? that was asked on behalf of an old freind of mine from yorkshire ????????????????? dont shooti,m jusy messanger Edited May 10, 2007 by Foxgun Tom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
polecat 1 Posted May 12, 2007 Report Share Posted May 12, 2007 You would be better off asking other peoples opinions regarding my honesty or integrity, you know me!! what do you think?? I don't represent anyone but myself!! Why ask the question, and whose the friend?? It all sounds pretty cryptic?? Regarding the original post!! I'll get Ian Clark the Director of SAC's to respond and I'll ask Tom Cruikshank (SAC'S Legal Advisor) if he'll respond and!! what the legal posistion was in this case Can you confirm that the owner of the dog that died!! took ill and suffered a heart attack at the same incident If the incident happened more than a year ago?? I can confirm that Ian Clark was not "the Boss" of the Scottish Association for Countrysports he!! did not take up his posistion as Director until last year!! David Cant may have been Director (Boss) at the time Tom fox gun as a respected member of the the lurcher world i,ve have to ask this question do you represent honisty ,integrity and would you stand firm loyal 2 true freinds ????????????? that was asked on behalf of an old freind of mine from yorkshire ????????????????? dont shooti,m jusy messanger no one took ill except the guys dog that died r i p as for who the boss is dosent relay matter its the facted that as a member of sacs i was not given any help to fight my case in the courts thats is why i made my origanal statement too make sure that all owners of said dangerous dogs or xs that have taken on sacs insurence that they are covered ??????????? remember folks we have diffrent laws from that of our english cousins so plz make sure before same happens to you Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.