Question 1
Tekst 1: the text “police back new law on killer dogs” by Jamie Doward, is about one police officer who has demanded a change to the law of dangerous dogs because of the dog attack on a five-year-old girl, Ellie Lawrenson.

From their point of view the law about dangerous dogs are unclear, outdated and it needs to be renovated. This change of law would not only intentionally target the dogs but more the owners of these dangerous dogs. The man behind this idea is Bernard Hogan-Howe, who reached the decision together with the chief constables.

The Kennel Club is pushing for a reform of the dangerous dog law because of the confusion about the Dangerous Dogs Act.
They do not want people to see dogs dangerous because of their breed, but based their actions.

The Kennel Club’s spokeswoman made a state that “pit bulls have certain traits but in the hands of responsible owners they would not be a danger. The act hasn’t worked; it’s failed to prevent a significant number of attacks. “
Which the RSPCA spokesman agrees with the Kennel Club.

Text 2:
The text “Jail owners of killer dogs” by Victoria Stilwell, she is against breed-specific legislation,
People should stop judging the dog immediately when something this terrible happens, it is not the dog’s fault, the owner should stand with the whole responsibility. The only thing it takes for people to see that, is just a little bit of sense.
People make rational decisions like calling for bans on certain breeds, because they do not have any sense.

She talks about how it is the owner’s fault that dog attacks happen. The owner should not let their dog be around children unsupervised, because it is dangerous. You never know what the dog may do. Children do not know how to be around dogs, they see them as cuddly teddy bears, they can jump on or yank their tails for fun. The dog off course does not like that, so it might fight back. Text 3
The text “If the dig is dangerous, the owner will be, too” by Simon Heffer, discusses the connection between the breed of dog and the dog owner, if the breed is dangerous then so must the owner be.
He says that pit bulls are the preferred dogs of criminals, then he mention the case about Ellie Lawrenson, who was killed by her uncle’s pit bull. Simon then draws a connection from the breed of the dog, to the uncle’s background as a convicted drug dealer.

Simon wrote that the Dangerous Dogs Act, were a pointless piece of legislation. It has not done it’s work. His comment to the Dangerous Dogs Act is that it was not necessary, but a Dangerous Humans was. He means that society has failed, and because of that Ellie Lawrenson is dead.

Question 2
The tone used by Simon Heffer is a bit harsh, he really wants his opinion and point of view to come forward in the text. He writes kind of freely because it do not seem that he has to be complete formal.
He want to show his feelings with words too, like in line 17 he used the word” beasts” instead of dogs. Because he uses this word he shows that he do not see the dogs who has attack humans, in his eyes they are beasts.

In line 45-46, he uses words like “for heaven’s sake” and “nasty”, these words again shows his opinion and catches our eye, and maybe offended some people, therefor we give him more of our attention.

He asks us question to make us a part of his thoughts, because of that we start to think more about what he is saying, and make our own answer to see if we agree or not. In that way he includes us, instead that we just sit there and read his opinion. (line 22-24)
He also talks about how pit bulls are preferred dogs of criminals, he draws a line, that we can relate to. We can picture it, because it is like that in the movies or in the street in our city.

He also has some critic pointed at the state because of a law a chief constable made. That resulted in a huge amount of criminals, because the occupants often were wanted on bail warrants or for more serious crimes.
Not all police forces maintain the law as hard, which followed the underclasses, went out of control. The criminals and their children regard school as an option and see drug dealing and theft as main careers. Because of school kids get shoot down at night and fraud, having an illegal dog is nothing particular, even if they attack children.
This is a big critic to the system, that is allows something like this to happen. His tone is a lot of critic. He says all the bad things, but do not offer a solution to the problems he finds.

rjQuestion 3
The 1. text do not offer that much of a solution, it only talks about we need to find a solution.
The 3. Text is more a critic of the law and system. It points out the faults, but do not come up with any solutions.
But both these texts point to there has be done something with the owners, but they do not come up with any ideas to how.
The 2. Text is the one who came closest to a solution, and give some options. It talks about how owners need to ask then self before they get a dog, are they ready for it, do they have a good home. She also advises people to go to dog training, so they can learn to control their dog. She also tells to buy dogs from rescue home or registered licensed breeders, and give advice what not to do.
So I feel that the 2. Text is the one who come up with the best solutions.