My Photo

Categories

follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« Can 47 dogs change what we think we know? | Main | LOST DOG: Stormy - please spread the word. »

July 17, 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451f90869e200e553a59f558833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference When it comes to dog laws, everyone's an expert:

Comments

Brian Cluxton

Excellent, Brent. We saw that first hand in Whitehall, OH - thankfully the ban failed. And it's happening just like that in Lakewood, OH as well. Many local politicians have no idea how to deal with the REAL problems in their communities and see pit bulls and other dogs as an easy target to make it appear like they are doing something for their community. As we all know, because of their reputation, a lot of pit bull owners don't have a lot of money and are not often well-connected in their community making them even easier targets. Lastly, in my opinion, there is a HUGE racial element to these debates about BSL in some communities - it's certainly that way in Toledo and Cincinnati.

Anna C.

As always - excellent piece my friend. And I love Bill Bruce...I want to marry that man. Oh wait!! I'm already married to a great guy!! Well then Bill Bruce for President!! Oh wait...another country.
*sighs*
Well - I will just have to be happy doing my part as a member of the Pit Bull Lobby (btw - where is my paycheck??) encouraging smarter folks to look to Bruce and Calgary as the epitome of good legislation.

Caveat

When one considers how low the Ontario Fiberals had to stoop to find 'experts' to support their ban in the court case, it becomes very obvious that expert opinion in this important area is ignored.

Hell, they had to use Tom Skeldon and Alan Beck, (I guess Clifton wasn't available). That's hurtin'!

MichelleD

I'd be willing to amend the Constitution to allow Bill to be our president. Hell, maybe he can just run - we're not using any of the rest of our Constitution anyway so maybe they'd overlook that "foreigner can't be president" thing.

Hey, maybe he could run in Ontario!?

KC KS Kills Dogs

My thoughts exactly Brent, why don't cities use experts from the field on crafting animal welfare laws.

I think I am going to show up at my community's next meeting on bridge building and repairs and demand to speak about a subject I know nothing about and demand the city leaders implement my design elements; to hell with the citizens' public safety.

Oh wait!! I forgot I live in that Commie town that would require a written, signed letter be submitted to the city clerk for prior approval by some secret committee and then slated for a speaking slot in front of the city council or whatever group the secret committee deems is appropriate.

Caveat

Let's not forget that some groups who have set themselves up as 'experts' in the eyes of unschooled officials are playing for the other team.

Militant AR groups lobby for bans, pet limits, MSN, breeder curtailment and more.

s kennedy

Yep--Caveat is right again--and remember we have several people/groups out there which instantly email/send out these horror pages to the officials which instantly "consider" BSL. BSL is an emotional pull, and of course the ARs are finely tuned for that.

Becky

I say let's strip AR of their right to use 'Rights'. Because they really do not respect or protect animals' rights. They only sit in judgment of who deserves to live and who deserves to die. Using the word 'rights' only deceives the uninformed GP and this is wrong!

PsyQuark

The most telling of all those links is the one from the Association for Pet Dog Trainers:

"Even more chilling, breed specific legislation encourages the faulty public perception of other breeds as being inherently safe. This can lead misguided individuals to engage in unsafe conduct with other breeds that can result in injury or death by individual representatives of those breeds mistakenly perceived as safe. Also, designating certain breeds as inherently dangerous implies to the public that behavior is not effectively influenced, positively or negatively, by training. This misconception will likely produce a growing number of dangerous dogs as misinformed, complacent dog owners fail to practice responsible aggression-prevention measures."

Attacks went up in Denver? Retrievers and mixes are one of the leading (if not leading) bitters? It all makes sense now.

The comments to this entry are closed.