Political Aspects of Dangerous Dogs

People are scared. A lot of people would rather walk about armed, or at least 'protected'. In local newspapers, and on national news websites, people deplore the lack of visible policing, the 'Bobby on the Beat'.

Many carry illegal weapons.

I believe that there is a large, and growing subculture of people who take great comfort in the fact that their protector, or family protector, is a big fighting-breed dog. A rottweiler is pretty much the deadliest weapon it is still legal to take down the street.

The politicians, especially those who value the working class vote, are afraid of enacting legislation (such as compulsory muzzling) out of fear of alienating that subculture and its vote. This week, another child has been bitten:

"Boy, 12, bitten in dog attack
Nov 21 2006
Audrey Forbes And Ron Livingstone, Evening Gazette"

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/news/tm_headline=boy--12--bitten-in-dog-attack&method=full&objectid=18131131&siteid=109975-name_page.html

( link is dynamic, so I'm not sure how long it will be valid, try googling: 'UK latest dog attack' ...the results change frequently... )

...But unfortunately our govt has set up a top down culture of target setting - and crime prevention cannot be measured.
Additionally, as i have noted here before, it seems as though it is in working class areas where the greatest density of these dogs are. Many people 'blame the owners' and that is a fair enough attitude I think, but a portion of the blame belongs to the politicians/Law/social divide as well. Where do politicians live? On estates?
I'd put fair money on it that champagne socialists like Diane Abbot (who talks some sense but sends her children to a private school, probably by car) live in areas where there is not a high density of fighting dogs. There is no pressing concern, for those who are in a position to not care.

Besides, they are also the ones blowing up 'the enemy' in their villages, shipping weapons to aggressive states, and causing the deaths and mutilations of children, so what are a few 'rotties' and 'staffies' to them?
Maybe it actually helps them, insofar as it fuels public fear, in a general sense. Fearful populations are more likely to accept new legislation/actions that they *do* want to enact, such as ID cards and centralised medical databases.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champagne_socialist