Behaviour, not appearance, make a dog dangerous

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/18/behaviour-not-appearance-make-a-dog-dangerous

Version 0 of 1.

The news that “firms giving advice on aggressive tax avoidance could face large fines” (17 August) is welcome. However, fines will be borne by the companies and the worry is that they will be treated, as they are now, as part of the cost of doing business. Not until “respected members of the community” working for the big four accountancy firms are jailed will this moral injustice be ended.Paul Brannen MEPLabour, North-East of England

• The horrific death of David Ellam (Dog kills man just days after police returned it to owner, 17 August) tragically highlights the failure of breed-specific legislation in section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act, which classifies dogs as dangerous based on their appearance rather than their actions. The fact that a few measurements can determine whether a dog is dangerous or not – rather than its behaviour – has never made sense and in this case led to heart-breaking consequences. Blue Cross wants to see a repeal of section 1 and instead a focus on empowering enforcers to tackle irresponsible owners and dangerous behaviour of any breed of dog before attacks happen, to keep our communities safe.Becky ThwaitesHead of public affairs, Blue Cross pet charity

• Phil Jones (Letters, 18 August) says it’s unlikely that further tidal barrages will be built further up the Severn due to environmental considerations, special protection area etc. This reminds me of a French politician who, when asked how his government got round such considerations when building a railway line, replied: “When we want to build a railway, we don’t ask the frogs first.”Michael GrangeSt Davids, Pembrokeshire

• Let’s not take the pith out of brief letters (Letters, 18 August).Alasdair McKeeLancaster

• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com