guard dogs at post office

[asciwhite]

Our local post office is off the beaten track and the post mistress does not sit behind any type of protection. Instead she chooses to sit at the till, now, robberies happen and such like and usually they're armed. I asked her if she felt safe and she said she has two very good guard dogs that will protect her if anything happened. I've seen the dogs and indeed they are beautiful large and viscious. How she would set them free if she was held up is anyones guess as they are behind a door, but if something was to happen and the dogs were let loose and they bit

a) the robber

or

b) an innocent

what would the consequences be for the animals and their owner?

[Whickerman]

If it was here in Ireland, she'd either be commended by the Gardai (police) or prosecuted for assault, and the animals put down, depending on the officer.

Either way, she'd be looking at a lawsuit

[asciwhite]

I'm not sure if she has warning signs up about the dogs and if she did is that any type of legal cover?

[stanleyman]

I think the post office would have something to say about this as it is their money and they provide the protection. They could sue her for any loss due to incompetance.

[Mudman]

If the dogs are employees of the Post Office.. Then there would be an appologetic letter sent out and no more would be said on the matter.

[kipchik]

But more often than not the robbers would get bit and then they'll turn round and sue her!

[lankeela]

If you have a 'beware of the dog' sign, then you are admitting that you have a dangerous dog and can be prosecuted. Far better to have one that says 'dogs running loose' or 'please close the gate' or even 'I live here' with a picture of the breed. I saw one recently that said, 'beware, this dog is not a vegetarian' and showed a kennel with a pile of human bones!

If the dogs bite anyone, innocent or guilty, then the owner will be taken to court and the dogs can be ordered to be destroyed.

I would not want to risk my dogs being shot or injured by an intruder.

[lankeela]

a) it injures any person; or
(b) there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will do so,
he is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog injures any person, an aggravated offence, under this subsection.

(4) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) or (3) above other than an aggravated offence is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both; and a person guilty of an aggravated offence under either of those subsections is liable�
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both;
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine or both.

[lankeela]

Last post was taken from the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.

[asciwhite]

Than you all, that is very interesting so now I will go and see her and make sure she is aware of the facts and then the rest is up to her.