The problem lies in that a person can say they felt threatened by a dog and the owner can be charged. If the dogs barks at you while in it yard as you pass by that dog is considered a dangerous dog. The act list dogo argentino, fila brasirio, pit bull, but not Stafford Terrier, and the tosa as dangerous banned breeds. It include crosses and type. Anything the court determines as type. This can and will include any dog that a person wants to make an issues out of.

http://www.nawt.org.uk/advice/changes-dangerous-dogs-act-advice-owners

https://www.gov.uk/control-dog-public/overview

http://www.worcsregservices.gov.uk/animal-health--welfare/dog-warden-service/banned-breeds--dangerous-dogs.aspx

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/dangerous-dogs-act-dog-welfare-group-warns-owners-that-dog-aggression-in-the-home-could-now-lead-to-prosecution-9392507.html

The problem is that the way in which the law is written it includes if your dog is barking in your yard. It does say this verbatim, but it uses the term antisocial behavior. This means the person does not have to be injured or bitten. You only have to make a claim that the dog displayed an antisocial behavior. This was explained to me by a well known trainer/behaviorist in the UK. He is also court appointed person that is called on in the dangerous dogs act. He does not believe pet owners should have dogs trained for protection. He doesn't believe that dog should be trained for protection other than police and military. But he does not agree with the dangerous dog act or the revision. But because he knows the law he is called on by the court to help enforce it. Even when he don't agree with the law he is bound to use it like it is written and help determine if a person/dog is or isn't guilty based upon the law instead of his personal opinion.