Dangerous Dogs Act is not working Backing for the truants

I NOTICED in the latest case (one of far too many) of a young vulnerable child being killed by a large dangerous dog (“Boy, 3, mauled to death by dog is named”, The Herald, May 18), the police are at pains to point out that the animal was put down “humanely”. The owner of the dog (this time, of Rochdale, Greater Manchester) was arrested under the Dangerous Dogs Act.

Two things are clear. Firstly, no one seems to focus on the fact that the children aren’t killed “humanely”. They die in pain and terror. Secondly, the Dangerous Dogs Act (as I’ve tried to explain to my local police and councillors and council) is supposed to prevent deaths and serious injury by actively working against the ownership of dangerous dogs – not helping the police make an easy arrest after yet another child has been torn apart. Amanda Baker, Edinburgh.

THE BBC and STV have given tacit approval to truancy by interviewing school-age Scottish children in Seville. What other events will they similarly categorise?

D Macintyre,

Greenock.