is this a fair sentence

[wallstone]

a man is walking down the street , eating a icecream ....he passes a driveway .......a neopolican mastiff (dog) comes out of the driveway ,jumps up on the man (assuming after his icecream ),,.the dogs head comes into contact with with the mans chin .......and the man bites his lip (no hospital treatment ,just a small cut lip ) the owner of the dog is summoned to local magistrates court found guilty of the dangerous dogs act ,, he is sentence 80 hours community service ,�280.00 fine , destuction of the animal , and band from keeping dogs for 10 years .........

[abanker]

The dogs' owner should be more careful keeping the dog from the public. But I do think the fine and a band from keeping the dog for 10 years is a bit harsh.

[abanker]

... forgot to mention destruction of the animal is unfair and very harsh.

[Bewlay Bros]

In a short sweet nutshell, yes it seems very harsh.

The dog may have just be playing, or trying to get the ice cream. Poor dog. Is it held in a kennel pending an appeal because it should be saved. Mastiffs are fantastic animals.

[wallstone]

the dog is safe ...... thankfully .....

[pingu97]

I agree it is a very harsh sentence although i think the dog should be kept on a shorter leash-harmless or not, i know this isnt the same but when i got to pick my daughter up from school, some parents chain their dogs on the school gates & go in to get their kids & it terrifies me as other kids go up to stroke them you never know when one might turn no matter how cute & cuddly they look!

[wallstone]

hopefully in spain under a assume name ,,..

[factor-fiction]

To answer your headline question wallstone, I think it's not a fair sentence. Your sentence doesn't start with a capital letter, there's virtually no punctuation (apart from ....), spelling is generally okay but there are some errors and a few apostrophes are missing. And was 'neopolican' the type of ice cream or the type of mastiff? Either way it would be neopolitan.

[wallstone]

fanks for pointing that out ........ ..................

[GlenB]

I think it's totally fair.

[PrinceRainie]

I think its totally fair. What if it was a small child walking past with an icecream. A dog as powerful as a mastiff could do some damage to a small child. It may have been an adult this time, but next it could well be a child etc etc etc etc

[Whoever]

It does seem a rather harsh decision on the dog and on the owner being banned from keeping dogs for 10 years, but the onus is on owners to keep their dogs under control. It was fortunate on this occasion that there were no severe injuries to the passer by, but a small child eating an identical ice cream might have been more severely injured. It sounds as if the dog has never received proper obedience training and for this reason alone, the owner has to be responsible.

[mrs_overall]

As the parent of a child who was attacked by a dog in similar circumstances, I think both the owner and the dog should be put down.

[dolly pond]

neoploitan dog? is that an icecream too? the man only bit his lip, so wot!!!! thats funny, but not for the owner of the doggy

[sinderella]

mrs overall for prime minister