Sioux City, IA is starting to become quite the little case study on BSL.
Shortly after the city passed a ban on 'pit bulls', city officials targeted those who used their democratic right to speak out against the law in front of the council by knocking on their doors and checking out their animals.
They then had to change how they collected licenses because the veterinary community didn't want to cooperate with the city because they opposed the breed specific law.
The city then had some "paperwork issues" that people were critical of that potentially violated people's 5th amendment rights that was later changed.
Now, it appears that the city councilman who was most responsible for pushing for the ban on pit bulls, Aaron Rochester, is awaiting his appeal to keep his Labrador Retriever because it has been declared vicious after biting his neighbor -- causing the neighbor to have stitches.
Isn't it interesting that the man who most strongly opposed recommendations from the ASPCA and local veterinarians for a breed neutral dangerous dog ordinance in favor of his own "pit bull" ban -- that has now caused hundreds of dogs that have never been a problem to be treated as dangerous animals -- now awaits a court decision on whether or not his dog -- a Labrador - is dangerous based on its actual behavior.
These people who want breed bans are model folks, eh?
More thoughts on this at Reason Hit & Run.
Comments