My Photo


follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« Do you know the real PETA and HSUS? | Main | Tough day for Children in Dallas Area »

March 22, 2007


Marjorie Darby

If I owned a breed targeted by bans, freedom restrictions, muzzle requirements, etc., I'd have left the area a long time ago. But that's just me. I still intend to leave Ontario, if the 'pit bull' ban stands. (But the freaking case is taking so long to be adjudicated, and the DLCC - or is it Banned Aid, or both? - vows to keep up the fight until the law is overturned. So, now I don't know...)

Still, the phrase "cold, dead hand" comes to mind for anyone even touching my dog without my consent.

In this particular case, I maybe understand the owner's actions but, then again, I don't; because if one really care about one's dog, one ensures it is 100% compliant with the law, and one doesn't put it in harm's way (physically or psychologically), no matter what some inexpert politician or animal control officer says.

Spilled milk now, I guess.


Interestingly enough when this pitbull ban was being voted on, only one city councilwoman in this city, Independence, MO, had the guts to vote NO. Councilwoman Lucy Young cited several reasons for her dissenting vote, but an important one - most of the citizens of her city could not afford to comply with the cost of the registration, wolf pen, insurance requirements, etc. to keep their dogs. Maybe that is why the owner did not license his dogs.


Yeah, that's the problem. I sometimes have to check myself because my fallback is that if my city passed BSL, even if it was a "restrictions" BSL, I'd just move. But I'm fortunate to have the financial means to do so. Most people really aren't that fortunate, and they're stuck with where they are. Not only could many not afford to move, the insurance and fencing requirements were going to be VERY expensive for people who stayed with their dogs (one friend of ours estimated it was going to cost her about $11,000 in year one).

Most people can't handle that...which is sure the situation these people were in. And like Cheryl said, Lucy Young was the one council member that actually cared about her constituents enough to get that...


I don't condone the conduct either, but I can say that if the gov't ever wanted to take my dogs for no good reason, other than their breed - they might want to send in SWAT, because that's the only way they will succeed. ;) If the dogs had no history of aggression and were not called about for being "vicious" (for non-breed reasons), the city needs to allow them a chance to get out, to remedy the situation - for goodness sake, they give amnesty for parking tickets, taxes, warrants, and all kinds of other stuff, but seem so happy to take your dogs and kill them . . .

The comments to this entry are closed.