Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
As published
107 Whether a dog is a danger to public safety
(1) The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is amended as follows.
(2) In section 1 (dogs bred for fighting) after subsection (6) there is inserted—
(6A) A scheme under subsection (3) or (5) may in particular include provision requiring a court to consider whether a person is a fit and proper person to be in charge of a dog.
(3) In section 4 (destruction and disqualification orders) after subsection (1A) there is inserted—
(1B) For the purposes of subsection (1A)(a), when deciding whether a dog would constitute a danger to public safety, the court—
(a) must consider—
(i) the temperament of the dog and its past behaviour, and
(ii) whether the owner of the dog, or the person for the time being in charge of it, is a fit and proper person to be in charge of the dog, and
(b) may consider any other relevant circumstances.
(4) Section 4B (destruction orders otherwise than on a conviction) is amended as follows—
(a) in subsection (1), after “section 5(1) or (2) below” there is inserted “ or in exercise of a power of seizure conferred by any other enactment ”;
(b) after subsection (2) there is inserted—
(2A) For the purposes of subsection (2)(a), when deciding whether a dog would constitute a danger to public safety, the justice or sheriff—
(a) must consider—
(i) the temperament of the dog and its past behaviour, and
(ii) whether the owner of the dog, or the person for the time being in charge of it, is a fit and proper person to be in charge of the dog, and
(b) may consider any other relevant circumstances.
Your change, as a redline
107 Whether a dog is a danger to public safety
(1) The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is amended as follows.
(2) In section 1 (dogs bred for fighting) after subsection (6) there is inserted—
(6A) A scheme under subsection (3) or (5) may in particular include provision requiring a court to consider whether a person is a fit and proper person to be in charge of a dog.
(3) In section 4 (destruction and disqualification orders) after subsection (1A) there is inserted—
(1B) For the purposes of subsection (1A)(a), when deciding whether a dog would constitute a danger to public safety, the court—
(a) must consider—
(i) the temperament of the dog and its past behaviour, and
(ii) whether the owner of the dog, or the person for the time being in charge of it, is a fit and proper person to be in charge of the dog, and
(b) may consider any other relevant circumstances.
(4) Section 4B (destruction orders otherwise than on a conviction) is amended as follows—
(a) in subsection (1), after “section 5(1) or (2) below” there is inserted “ or in exercise of a power of seizure conferred by any other enactment ”;
(b) after subsection (2) there is inserted—
(2A) For the purposes of subsection (2)(a), when deciding whether a dog would constitute a danger to public safety, the justice or sheriff—
(a) must consider—
(i) the temperament of the dog and its past behaviour, and
(ii) whether the owner of the dog, or the person for the time being in charge of it, is a fit and proper person to be in charge of the dog, and
(b) may consider any other relevant circumstances.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.