Update on NI's most lethal weapon

eilo1

I completely respect and agree with your determination not to want to muzzle this dog.

But imagine the court case if by some freak accident Bruce did attack another dog or worse some person. All the prosecution would have to do is show "Well, it's been 6 months since I collected him in Bangor under heavy guard of the Enforcement Officers of the Down Borough." this.

The trained would be liable up to his eyes in it!

Im not saying the trainer is doing the best thing for the dog, but its naive to think he should accept your word on something that could bankrupt him!

toadfly

eilo1 wrote: »

Im not saying the trainer is doing the best thing for the dog, but its naive to think he should accept your word on something that could bankrupt him!

But why pick on Bruce? I'm sure his insurance covers him for any possibilities so there is no need to pick on one particular dog. The same could be said for any dog in the group so the same rules should apply for all.

EGAR

Eilo, you misunderstood the whole Bruce affair, Bruce was incarcerated to the way he looks not for any aggressive behaviour.

Shanao

FFS, pure Bruce. We need a restricted breed only agility club

eilo1

EGAR wrote: »

Eilo, you misunderstood the whole Bruce affair, Bruce was incarcerated to the way he looks not for any aggressive behaviour.

No edgar I get that; but unfortunately the courts dont! I have no doubt that the dog can be a terrific pet in the right hands or maybe in any hands. But I feel sorry for the trainer being stuck between a rock and a hard place in a sue happy society. He is leaving himself wide open by allowing "the NI's most lethal weapon" unmuzzled in his class.

aoife2k

Bruce's smile says it all... shows his happiness and obvious love for crocs :-D All the best with him xx

LucyBliss

I agree that we do live in a society where people are quick to find fault and sue and that someone agreeing to train dogs of all shapes and sizes has to be careful, but I would think that any and all policies regarding breeds, even if it's something along the lines of "if your dog resembles a restricted breed" type thing, needs to be clearly laid out in any contract and I don't think this was. Also it's bad form to let the dogs be there for one session and then land this stipulation on them. It really should have been mentioned either before the first session or immediately after.

I would assume that they wouldn't accept anyone for agility training who didn't already have a good working relationship with their dogs regarding commands and control. I mean, when you're waiting for your turn to do the course, the last thing you want is someone teaching their dog the 'come on' command. So you wouldn't be expecting anyone's dog to suddenly turn scrappy because they should be too busy learning the course.

I am incredibly disappointed in the club for this ruling because it would be an opportunity to show people just how great these dogs can be and also, from the photos I've seen, it looks like they're depriving themselves of what could be their greatest walking advertisements for the club because Bruce was clearly having a ball and picking it up.
After reading so much about Bruce and becoming very fond of him from afar, I would be in bits if I thought he had to have a muzzle put on him again.

eilo1

TillyGirl wrote: »

But why pick on Bruce? I'm sure his insurance covers him for any possibilities so there is no need to pick on one particular dog. The same could be said for any dog in the group so the same rules should apply for all.

I dont know the ins and outs of an insurance policy but we all know they will squire out of any payment if possible. Based on the publicity this dog has gained they would have a good case in court in my opinion.

EGAR

eilo1 wrote: »

No edgar I get that; but unfortunately the courts dont! I have no doubt that the dog can be a terrific pet in the right hands or maybe in any hands. But I feel sorry for the trainer being stuck between a rock and a hard place in a sue happy society. He is leaving himself wide open by allowing "the NI's most lethal weapon" unmuzzled in his class.

The name is EGAR (East Galway Animal Rescue) and if you were familiar with the case then you would know where the *lethal weapon* came from.

He is NOT a restricted breed, he is NOT a Pit Bull and he is no more aggressive than my Yorkie.

Also, the Club has public liability, so has EGAR and do you honestly think I would expose a dog to tons of dogs and people if I hand't assessed him properly?

I give up...

toadfly

eilo1 wrote: »

I dont know the ins and outs of an insurance policy but we all know they will squire out of any payment if possible. Based on the publicity this dog has gained they would have a good case in court in my opinion.

I dont know anything about his insurance either I can only assume what he has to be covered for before he can have the class. But insisting that a dog is put at risk of injury is just crazy.

Bruce wasnt aggressive, the whole case was complete and utter BS or he wouldnt have been released to EGARs care. It shouldnt matter if its Bruce or any other dog. I have met Bruce, he is amazing and so affectionate and this is so unfair.

eilo1

LucyBliss wrote: »

I agree that we do live in a society where people are quick to find fault and sue and that someone agreeing to train dogs of all shapes and sizes has to be careful, but I would think that any and all policies regarding breeds, even if it's something along the lines of "if your dog resembles a restricted breed" type thing, needs to be clearly laid out in any contract and I don't think this was. Also it's bad form to let the dogs be there for one session and then land this stipulation on them. It really should have been mentioned either before the first session or immediately after.

I would assume that they wouldn't accept anyone for agility training who didn't already have a good working relationship with their dogs regarding commands and control. I mean, when you're waiting for your turn to do the course, the last thing you want is someone teaching their dog the 'come on' command. So you wouldn't be expecting anyone's dog to suddenly turn scrappy because they should be too busy learning the course.

I am incredibly disappointed in the club for this ruling because it would be an opportunity to show people just how great these dogs can be and also, from the photos I've seen, it looks like they're depriving themselves of what could be their greatest walking advertisements for the club because Bruce was clearly having a ball and picking it up.
After reading so much about Bruce and becoming very fond of him from afar, I would be in bits if I thought he had to have a muzzle put on him again.

This is actually a very good flip side of what I was saying. (hang on that sounds crazy!)

I was basically saying that the trainer is protecting him self. But if he was very clever as this poster points out. He could be saying "NI most lethal weapon successfully completing in agility blah blah blah"

eilo1

EGAR wrote: »

The name is EGAR (East Galway Animal Rescue) and if you were familiar with the case then you would know where the *lethal weapon* came from.

He is NOT a restricted breed, he is NOT a Pit Bull and he is no more aggressive than my Yorkie.

Also, the Club has public liability, so has EGAR and do you honestly think I would expose a dog to tons of dogs and people if I hand't assessed him properly?

I give up...

Sorry for the spelling,

I get where it comes from and I realise that your dog is not restricted. I never mentioned him being restricted.

I am only pointing out that the dog has being publicly described as the above quotes from yourself! That leaves you at a liability and the trainer of the class for admitting a dog described as "NI most leathal weapon" into his class unmuzzled!. If brought up in court could be scene as negligence.

I know none of this is in any way representative of your dogs behavior. I am simply pointing out that the trainer is watching his back in a sue happy society.
It is the courts that have the problem not your dog. But dont shoot the trainer for protecting his business!

Eibhin

I agree he has handled this extremely badly and missed a great opportunity.

He should have had a chat with you before tomorrow's class, you could have asked to see the contract again, and had a face to face discussion about it. Maybe he is not aware of Bruce's history, in which case he may have handled it differently.

However I do think it's extremely unfair to lambaste him all over his Facebook business page without first trying to talk to him again tomorrow.

If he is just starting out it could be detrimental for him.

EGAR

For the last time the phrase *NI most lethal weapon* was NOT coined by me or anyone belonging to me but by the NI press as a tongue-in-cheek reaction to his release into EGAR care.

EGAR

Eibhin wrote: »

I agree he has handled this extremely badly and missed a great opportunity.

He should have had a chat with you before tomorrow's class, you could have asked to see the contract again, and had a face to face discussion about it. Maybe he is not aware of Bruce's history, in which case he may have handled it differently.

However I do think it's extremely unfair to lambaste him all over his Facebook business page without first trying to talk to him again tomorrow.

If he is just starting out it could be detrimental for him.

He is well aware of Bruce's history, Eibhin, and I told him again tonight. He hung up on me when I asked for my money back (bear in mind it was a double whammy for me as my 6 yro is also participating with his own dog).

eilo1

I get that EGAR, im just trying to point out how it could be construed in court!

EGAR

eilo1 wrote: »

I get that EGAR, im just trying to point out how it could be construed in court!

Ahm, I've got the original article which pre-dates my post here by six months.. I am sure a court would be happy with that!

EGAR

Anyway on a MUCH brighter note, a friend of EGAR has just announced that she will sponsor an agility set for the rescue dogs which includes Bruce of course. An incredible generous gesture which has really touched me.

So if anyone fancies a go you are all more than welcome once the set has arrived !!

And I might make you a cuppa afterwards as well

homerhop

Without wanting to fan the flames of this fire, I am surprised that some of the more buisness savy folks out there have not set up an agility class for RB.

Eibhin

Well at least something good has come out of tonight. That was a really nice gesture.

I cannot believe he hung up. And you definitely deserve a full refund. That is really unprofessional.

Your 6 year old will be so excited to set up your own agility course now!
Much better fun!

EGAR

homerhop wrote: »

Without wanting to fan the flames of this fire, I am surprised that some of the more buisness savy folks out there have not set up an agility class for RB.

Lol, I might do that now .

DBCyc

EGAR wrote: »

Anyway on a MUCH brighter note, a friend of EGAR has just announced that she will sponsor an agility set for the rescue dogs which includes Bruce of course. An incredible generous gesture which has really touched me.

So if anyone fancies a go you are all more than welcome once the set has arrived !!

And I might make you a cuppa afterwards as well

That's great - it sounds like it will work out for the best. The negative reaction here and on the facebook page is a good representation of dog lovers' disdain for any discrimination based on breed.

Cherry Blossom

eilo1 wrote: »

I get that EGAR, im just trying to point out how it could be construed in court!

Unlike yourself the Irish courts system is well aware of what sarcasm is :rolleyes:.

I would not be letting this go EGAR, if he's worried about getting sued he's obviously never heard the term 'in breach of contract' :mad:. It's pretty stupid to go about avoiding a potential claim that is never going to happen by facilitating a potential claim that would have every likelyhood of succeeding and possibly shut him down. Yet more ignorance and arrogance from the human race!

Whispered

I can't get onto FB in work (which is where I am now - booo) so EGAR (or someone) could you do a screen shot of the comments on the FB page. I'm sure they will be deleted by the time I get to look in the morning.

Also, Sarah , you lolled above about the agility course but really - you could do it and use it to raise funds for EGAR. :eek: What a blessing in disguise.

Little phoenix, Harley and I might plan a night in Galway to give it a try. Woooo holidays!

Cherry Blossom

EGAR wrote: »

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Western-Dog-Sports-Training-Club/184476711584896?v=wall

Facebook page deleted :rolleyes:

ToniTuddle

Whispered wrote: »

Also, Sarah , you lolled above about the agility course but really - you could do it and use it to raise funds for EGAR. :eek: What a blessing in disguise.

Excellent idea for raising funds!

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

Facebook page deleted :rolleyes:

Knew it!! Wonder did he even take the time to read through them all.

Nearly all were really thought out and well worded. There was about 16 or so people left comments. Letting the dude know that A) it's dangerous for the dogs and muzzles etc are not allowed at dog shows/agility classes as a result B)provided links to proof of this C)they were seriously unhappy and were going to spread the word about this carry on.

Some folks let their anger through a bit :pac:
Was telling my mate on msn about it and copied and pasted these so here they are! The last one is a bit harsh I guess but I did let out a chuckle :o

"If this is the 'Welcome' that you offer to dogs needing aparant 'training'
I think its a bit remiss on your behalf. Peadophiles get better chances in society than what you are offering"

"I think maybe you've missed your vocation and its goldfish you should be trying to train...AND DEAD ONES AT THAT!"

lrushe

EGAR so sorry to hear how Bruce was treated at his agility class, as you've stated he is not a Restricted Breed and should be treated the same as any other dog walking through their doors, he posses no more of a danger any other dog.
I do agility with my Rottweiler and I am happy to say she has never been treated like anything other than just another dog, I'd be v.disheartened if she was so I can understand where you are coming from.
Great news about the new agility class starting up, I think it's exactly what Bruce needs, wouldn't it be a great 'two fingers up' to his previous trainer to see him compete and maybe even win in future events.
Chin up, anyone who can't see what a star Bruce is doesn't deserve to be around him!

ISDW

homerhop wrote: »

Without wanting to fan the flames of this fire, I am surprised that some of the more buisness savy folks out there have not set up an agility class for RB.

I do get where your coming from, but why should they have to do these activities seperately from all other dogs? Discodog put up about the weight pulling competition that was held, because it was full of RB dogs, the ISPCA reported it, and the Gards turned up. Maybe they didn't do anything, but I think this would be the same thing if you had any group of only RB dogs together. You may think I'm going over the top a bit, but its breed racism. If you go to any agility show, you will see a lot of GSDs there, yet they are on the RB list. The club that I'm involved in does dryland mushing and similar activities. We will not use a venue that insists RB dogs have to be muzzled. Our insurance understands that, and we are covered. A dog is a dog is a dog, I think the fact that these dogs do these activities shows that their owners are responsible, so they really shouldn't be punished for it.

EGAR wrote: »

Anyway on a MUCH brighter note, a friend of EGAR has just announced that she will sponsor an agility set for the rescue dogs which includes Bruce of course. An incredible generous gesture which has really touched me.

So if anyone fancies a go you are all more than welcome once the set has arrived !!

And I might make you a cuppa afterwards as well

I think thats great, but still shouldn't be the way it is. We may pop down one day, the huskies will show you how its done - as long as its in a fully enclosed field of course, otherwise they'd be gone:D

homerhop

I agree 100% with what you are saying, but if you can show that you can have a large number of RB dogs in one place at the same time without any trouble would it not go one step further to prove the point that the dogs are not any trouble. It would be a good PR step too.
Has anyone involvved with RB questioned the ISPCA about their actions on that day?
I am a springer person, we have had other breeds but my love of dogs is for springers. My contact with RB has been very little, but I dont fear them in any way, in fact when i am out with the pup I am more aware of terriers coming to have a sniff than some of the bigger breeds.

EGAR

I was informed this morning that one of the trainers (Rachel) has resigned from the club in disgust over the whole issue. Fair play to you, Rach!!! I was also informed that the sessions were cancelled, the club has been closed down and all the people would be re-funded in full. I have no idea what the story is tbh.

I have an appointment for Thursday as I am still taking legal advice on this. My son is heartbroken about not being able to go. But Rachel has offered to give him 1 to 1 this weekend!

Also, an old hand in agility has informed me that the *trainers* are beginners themselves.

Honestly, I give up....