My Photo


follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« Missouri HB 1116/SB 865 would prohibit laws targeting breeds in Missouri | Main | KCPP Opens Second satellite adoption location »

March 25, 2014


Michelle Rivera

As usual well written/stated Brent!


If local governments can override state laws, doesn't it kind of require asking the question "what's the point of state government"? I often wonder this IRT Colorado......


Its never set well with me either Emily...if you're a little town you have to obey but big cities get to do what they want?


In Colorado,as I understand their constitution, almost any town can declare itself a "home rule" location... and almost every town has. One town that DIDNT, Wellington, actually had to rescind its BSL after the state law passed


I have a theory in a few years mastiffs will be the dangerous dog breed.
from what i have seen pits were not leading fatalities till 2006. but were seen as dangerous much earlier. mastiffs are technically the second most dangerous breed this year.


Well, obviously we all know there is no such thing as an "aggressive breed". But what we do know over the years that as certain breeds have become targeted, people who want an aggressive dog will move on to a different en vogue breed.

You may be right that what we are seeing is a shift. Hopefully when the inevitable shift happens people will have learned the lesson that focusing on the behavior of dogs, and owners, is the most critical part of creating safe communities -- not targeting breeds of dogs.

The comments to this entry are closed.