My Photo


follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« European Breed Bans and admitting failure | Main | Denver Court Case Revived »

May 27, 2009



I still think in the VAST majority of places anti-tethering will be used as the new BSL/MSN to seize and kill dogs. Most of the aggregious tethering situations could be fixed by applying basic cruelty laws.

I'd rather see the conditions of the dogs residence improved (chained or not)- such as no heavy chains, must have secured water - no excuse for tipped water bowls, appropriately sized housing in good condition, proper length and a place to stay that will be dry at all times.

Killing to save - "Those that can make you believe absurdities can make you commit autrocities". Too many people are believing dogs need to be killed if their conditions aren't perfect. It's sickening...


I don't like that Illinois law. It makes sense to prohibit those involved with dogfighting from owning dogs (any dogs), but why anyone else? Aren't there sufficient controls in place to prevent irresponsible owners, no matter their criminal past, from abusing their pets? If there aren't, maybe that needs to be addressed, rather than coming at it all sideways like that.

I think what skeeves me the most, really, is that it seems to rely too much on profiling. It feeds into the pervasive notion that there's some clear, definable, and overwhelmingly malevolent underclass that's responsible for our social ills; and reining in Those People is an effective means for restoring and maintaining order.

The comments to this entry are closed.