If you needed even more proof that one should “blame the deed, not the breed”, I’d like to introduce you to Jason Bloor of the United Kingdom.

You see, Mr. Bloor is not exactly a stand-up kind of guy.

In 2003, Mr. Bloor was suspected of conspiracy to rob a victim of domestic violence, Tania Moore. Her former fiancé, Mark Dyche, allegedly hired Mr. Bloor and 3 other men to rob and assault Ms. Moore. Mr. Dyche ended up standing trial for the murder of Tania (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article383400.ece)

In June of 2009, Mr. Bloor admitted to allowing his 3 Rottweilers to attack a woman and kill her poodle. (http://www.nowpublic.com/world/man-21-bled-death-after-alsatians-bit-him-51-times) He was charged under the “Dangerous Dogs Act”, “given a 12-month supervision order, sent on an offending behaviour scheme and had to pay £250 compensation…” (http://www.ukandspain.com/dangerous-dogs/)

After that conviction, Mr. Bloor moved on to Alsatians (German Shepherds). It was those 3 dogs that mauled Andrew Walker to death in May of 2009. (http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/cheadle/news/Lodger-killed-fighting-pet-dogs/article-1566859-detail/article.html)

But what does this all really mean?

For one thing, a person of less than moral character will find a way to do whatever vile thing he or she wants to do. Ban him from Rottweilers, he’ll move to German Shepherds. Ban him from assault rifles, he’ll move to handguns. Take away his drivers license, and he’ll simply drive illegally.

Jason Bloor is just flat out not the kind of guy I’d want to see in a dark alley, period. He wasn’t a responsible owner with the Rottweilers, and he surely wasn’t responsible with the German Shepherds. I have no doubt that if he had a pack of 3-legged Pugs, we would hear about them attacking someone. Keep in mind, neither Rottweilers nor German Shepherds are banned under the UK’s Dangerous Dogs Act, so I’m assuming that all those that voted in favor (favour?) of the Act were absolutely dumbfounded that despite all their well-intentioned banning, there are still reports of fatal dog attacks.

I’ll go out on a limb here and suggest that perhaps, just perhaps, if the Dangerous Dogs Act focused on irresponsible ownership and criminal behavior instead of a dog’s physical traits, Mr. Walker would still be alive today.

It’s a travesty that Mr. Walker’s death was ruled an accident. The only accident here is that Mr. Bloor will remain a free man, free to own more dogs that will no doubt kill again.

Author: Rachele L.