Powered by iPetitions - Start your online petition now

Signatures 554 total

Page: « 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ... 12 »

  1. 101
    Name: Sandi Wicks on Jun 9, 2007
    Comments: I object strongly againt this law , especially the 'back door ' approach with wich the council have used to get it through. It is yet another breach of civil liberties OVER MY DEAD BODY !
    Flag
  2. 102
    Name: Stephen Clissold on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: As an owner of two Lurchers I find this proposal as preposterous as the suggestion that all children under the age of 18 should be accompanied by an adult and kept on a lead. Southwark's web site suggests that dogs should be let off the lead and allowed to run around and I don't understand how two such diametrically opposed ideas can be expounded by the same Council.
    Flag
  3. 103
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: I wholeheartedly support this campaign, I am convinced that the only people to observe and obey this new ruling will be those who already adopt a responsible attitude. Those irresponsible owners will not take any notice at all.
    Flag
  4. 104
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: I don't have a dog now but I did for 13 years . My daughters have lovely well behaved dogs .Most doge are walked by responsible people who control and clean up after them. It is reprehensible that these people and their dogs are punished for the actions of the few who are irresponsible. Furthermore the fact that this byelaw was effected without due process shows contempt for law and the people of the borough , a sneaky attempt at hoping to get something over on us. If this is not the case let the council show why there was no dis cussion or publicity befor the signs went up.
    Flag
  5. 105
    Name: Barbara Bond on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  6. 106
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: i do not have a dog but did for 13 years.it is reprehensible that responsible dog owners and their dogs shpuld be penalised for the actions of the irresponsible few. In addition thway the byelaw wa ignored without due process show a contempt for the law and the people of the borough. Can the council show otherwise
    Flag
  7. 107
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: i do not have a dog but did for 13 years.it is reprehensible that responsible dog owners and their dogs shpuld be penalised for the actions of the irresponsible few. In addition thway the byelaw wa ignored without due process show a contempt for the law and the people of the borough. Can the council show otherwise
    Flag
  8. 108
    Name: Nicholas Simpsonj on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: Disgusting avoidance of the duty of care that soutyhwark council should provide but seem to wish to dodge.
    Flag
  9. 109
    Name: Nicholas Simpsonj on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: Disgusting avoidance of the duty of care that soutyhwark council should provide but seem to wish to dodge.
    Flag
  10. 110
    Name: Caroline BORIS on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  11. 111
    Name: Caroline Simpson on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  12. 112
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: One wonders how much additional tax payers money will be spent to enforce the proposed changes to the by-law
    Flag
  13. 113
    Name: Kylie Vilcins on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  14. 114
    Name: Francis Maguire on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  15. 115
    Name: Mitzi Wyman on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: I think it outrageous that signage should already have been commissioned. Also, many people are pleased to see dog walkers around who make them feel safe in otherwise empty parks.
    Flag
  16. 116
    Name: Cathal O'Doherty on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: I strongly object to this kneejerk, unjustifiable and premature ruling by Southwark. Stop this bit of nanny-state nonsense Let common sense and reason prevail please!
    Flag
  17. 117
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  18. 118
    Name: Susan McQuail on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: The Parks department have got a cheek to behave in this way and not the first time look at the tree planting on peckham Rye also without consultation All power to your elbow
    Flag
  19. 119
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: Responsible owners should not be penalised for the few anti-social owners. The law already exists to prosecute these owners.
    Flag
  20. 120
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: I cannot believe that Southwark Council are considering such a cruel action. How on earth can dogs get their much needed proper physical exercise on a lead how can an owner throw a ball to wear out the energetic labrador How can the elderly owner walk quickly enough for their beloved canine companion Oh, it's all just too ridiculous! Badly behaved children and irresponsible cyclists have got their freedom!! How can the Council square their action with the new Animal Welfare Act Honestly, too much of our council tax is being spent on the wrong issue. How DARE the council behave in this way - with our money! Yes - prosecute the irresponsible owners - but leave us law-abiding ones alone please.
    Flag
  21. 121
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: I cannot believe that Southwark Council are considering such a cruel action. How on earth can dogs get their much needed proper physical exercise on a lead how can an owner throw a ball to wear out the energetic labrador How can the elderly owner walk quickly enough for their beloved canine companion Oh, it's all just too ridiculous! Badly behaved children and irresponsible cyclists have got their freedom!! How can the Council square their action with the new Animal Welfare Act Honestly, too much of our council tax is being spent on the wrong issue. How DARE the council behave in this way - with our money! Yes - prosecute the irresponsible owners - but leave us law-abiding ones alone please.
    Flag
  22. 122
    Name: Sian Ryan on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  23. 123
    Name: Amanda Grimes on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: This ban is tantamount to animal cruelty. Dogs need exercise and can't possibly get it just at the end of a lead. I would have to walk my dog the equivalent of 10 miles a day to give him the kind of exercise he gets chasing his ball Burgess Park (a park I might add that the Council seems to care very little about in any other respect). The Council would be better to spend their time finding those dogs who are never walked - at the end of a lead or otherwise - kept locked in houses or tiny back gardens by their tenants; dogs who are so stressed by their living conditions they bark continuously. I for one have continued to let my dog play off his lead in Southwark's larger parks despite the signs because as a responsible member of society I refuse to let the unthinking few have the final say.
    Flag
  24. 124
    Name: Marion Abbott on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  25. 125
    Name: Robert O'Neill on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  26. 126
    Name: Karen Slack on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: My 2 dogs are very well behaved and have done nothing to deserve this ban! DO NOT punish the majority over a few ignorant owners. Its my right as a human being to walk in the park and give my dogs OFF lead excersise. The council should employ park rangers like they used to for each park and give them the authority to fine people and ask them to keep out of control dogs on lead!! Do not punish the well behaved dogs and people in our parks. Spend more time on the vandals as the summer is coming and we all know what happens then! LEAVE THE LAW ABIDING DOG WALKERS ALONE! We only want to excersise our dogs as man has done for thousands of years.
    Flag
  27. 127
    Name: Sue Foster on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: Leave our dogs alone! We are responsible dog owners who clean up after our dogs and do not let them run amok. Target the oiks who don't. Not us!!!
    Flag
  28. 128
    Name: Nick Major on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: This proposed dog control order goes totally against the view of the vast majority of local park users - The local parks are a resource for all and that includes dog owners. Look at who really uses the parks - daily - all through the year - not just on summer weekend days - the biggest users of the local parks are dog owners - what other business or organisation would introduce measures to penalise and alienate their main user group. This proposed policy is ill thought nonsense and shows how far removed the proponents at Southwark Council are are from the people they are supposed to serve.
    Flag
  29. 129
    Name: Gilbert Krause on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  30. 130
    Name: Nancy on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: A complete unfair and ridiculous proposal that penalises responsible owners and their dogs.
    Flag
  31. 131
    Name: Elspeth Brown on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  32. 132
    Name: Paul Diggins on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  33. 133
    Name: Nick Tribe on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: This is an unfair plan that will be detrimental to the overwhelming majority of dog owners who use the parks and keep their dogs under control. It is the dog owners who are in the park early in the morning and in the evening, keeping an eye on suspicious behavour and potential vandalism. Drive the dog owners away and you will see vandalism in the parks in crease, especially during the winter.
    Flag
  34. 134
    Name: Jeff & Jill Parrington on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: We pay council taxes, same as everyone else. We should be entitled to take our dogs to the parks with us.
    Flag
  35. 135
    Name: Caroline Moffatt on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  36. 136
    Name: LINDA REDMOND on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  37. 137
    Name: Theresa Proudfoot on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  38. 138
    Name: Sarah Johnson on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: I have two lovely dogs who love to run in open spaces but who are well trained and well behaved and no problem to anyone else. They should not be punished because of the actions of a few idiots. Surely there are more important things to focus on in Southwark
    Flag
  39. 139
    Name: Alison Harvey on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  40. 140
    Name: Alison Harvey on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  41. 141
    Name: Chris Evans on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: Common sense must be used here. We don't imprison the entire nation to prevent murder and assault. We don't impose nationwide 9pm curfews to prevent burglary. Current laws allow for owners of "out of control" dogs to be prosecuted but a blanket ban flies in the face of not only common sense but basic rights of owners and in this instance the animals themselves
    Flag
  42. 142
    Name: Malcolm Torz on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: This law will punish the majority of responsible dog owners for the antisocial behaviouyr of a few. Would the Council then ban all teenagers from all parks because of the firework throwing abusive few that I encountered over the last year
    Flag
  43. 143
    Name: Harold Hickenbottom on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  44. 144
    Name: Isabelle Pallix on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: The Council's scarce resources would be better used dealing with vandalism in parks rather than being spent on persecuting a usually inoffensive group of society. Has Southwark gone mad
    Flag
  45. 145
    Name: Sohana on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  46. 146
    Name: Simon Knox on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  47. 147
    Name: Lucy Freeborn on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: stop the ban!
    Flag
  48. 148
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: Dogs will be unable to play and have a good amount of excercise if they are to be kept on the lead. This is an outrageous rulling, obviously made by eople who do not know or understand the care for a healthy dog.
    Flag
  49. 149
    Name: Sophie Clark on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments:
    Flag
  50. 150
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2007
    Comments: Its the councils own fault if they cannot spot the 'antisocal' dogs - as it were - and this act of ruling is clearly an act of laziness to try harder at doing so. Why should everyone else have to succumb to this level of madness because the council are shit.
    Flag

Page: « 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ... 12 »

Sponsored links