We need penalties for those owners who allow their dogs to attack and kill other dogs, cats, and other animals. We need better controls on dog breeding, advertising and sales. Only when we insist on better behaviour from the person on the other end of the lead will we be able to address the dangerous owner problem.
It seems to be one of the perils of running a business in a city, if we were in the country I'm pretty certain I could make use of a church hall, a rugby club or a horse riding centre. My issue is that if we want our dogs to be properly socialised in the right way, for owners and dogs to be taught, to receive advice and learn then I need to be able to provide a safe and productive space to do this.
If you can keep your dog in sight at all time, be aware of what they are doing and be confident your dog will come back to you promptly when you call, then there is no need to put them on a lead. But if you can not be confident they will return when you call, then a lead is the safest option for everyone.
Bobi was a political pawn, used by the media to condemn the RSPCA. In this case, the two charities in question were both doing the right thing in relation to the remit of their policies. The media hysteria, public bias and negative publicity meant that the death of Bobi would have haunted the RSPCA in 2014.
There are strong rules and regulations on weapons, and gun licencing laws in place, yet anyone, anywhere can go out and buy a puppy from a pet shop or breed from their dog, which could potentially grow to be a lethal weapon. These dogs are on our streets and, despite looking cute, can be as dangerous as a firearm.
Thurston's case is a really good illustration of showing that all dog behaviour happens for a reason. The key is to not overreact and try to look at the situation objectively and just as we have, always make sure you ask your vet to do a thorough examination before implementing training or behavioural changes.