Search South Africa Online using Google. Simply enter your search keywords in the box below and click the search button!
| Pepper sprays - precedent set re use on dogs |
(2006-05-12) “Noddy” van Greenen, of Sundowner admitted guilt after charges been laid against him relating to his use of a pepper (“self-defence”) spray on a dog in the complex where he is resident.
According to the affidavit of Senior Inspector Phillip Roberts of the SPCA Randburg, van Greenen’s neighbour’s dog was purposefully and maliciously lured from the inside of its residence to the gate where the dog was sprayed in the face with pepper spray, “causing unnecessary suffering.”
The cross-Maltese dog named Szieghain received emergency treatment at a nearby veterinary clinic and survived.
In making this matter public, the NSPCA has reservations in that what happened may give other people ideas. But it is felt that the danger of this is far outweighed by sending the message out loud and clear that the use of pepper spray or similar products on animals:
- is an offence in terms of the Animals Protection Act
- will be taken seriously, including the laying of criminal charges
- will be acted upon by the SAPS as well as the SPCA.
The National Council of SPCAs (NSPCA) has been asked by several nation-wide operations if it would give approval for or would condone employees carrying these so-called self defence sprays to have as a deterrent in the event of an attack by dogs. The NSPCA stance in every instance has been to oppose and to advise that these devices are not carried or used. The dangers of nefarious, malicious, reckless or unnecessary use of these devices need to be taken into account.
In the recent case when Mr van Greunen admitted the use of a pepper spray on a dog, there was neither justification of self-defence nor did he raise it in his defence. The attack was unwarranted, pre-meditated and malicious.
Attorneys acting on behalf of the NSPCA previously issued a statement clarifying the NSPCA position on the product, which is: -
- neither the NSPCA nor any individual SPCA has given its approval for the use of the product and they do not endorse its use
- the distributor has been repeatedly advised of the above in writing by the NSPCA’s attorneys
- the use of the product on animals may well result in criminal charges and prosecution in terms of the Animals Protection Act No 71 of 1962.
Return to the previous page.
|
