Brookside, Alabama Considers Restrictions for “Pit Bulls”
From The Birmingham News:
“Brookside officials are considering an ordinance with constrictions for pit bull owners in the town.
…’It’s going to be hard to have a pit bull in Brookside, if this gets adopted,’ said Mayor Roger McCondichie.
The proposed ordinance would require owners of dangerous dogs, including pit bulls, to register the dogs and pay a $50 fee.
If taken outside, the dog must be kept on a four-foot leash and wear a muzzle. Dog owners would have to keep the dogs indoors or in a pen, post a “Beware of Dog” sign on property, and provide proof of liability insurance for $100,000 for bodily injury, death or property damage.
Residents who don’t comply with the proposed ordinance could face fines of $200-$500.
The Brookside ordinance describes three kinds of dogs – the American pit bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier and the Staffordshire bull terrier.”
Read this article in its entirety here.
If “pit bull” is defined by Brookside as being three breeds of dog, does it not follow that statistics on “pit bulls” might be skewed? Brookside, like so many other cities, has a free-roaming dog problem, and of course free-roaming dogs are not limited to one breed.
Please contact the Brookside Mayor and City Council and politely inform them that breed-specific legislation in any form is ineffective and unenforceable.
Related Posts By Category
- Hazel Park, Michigan Considers Restrictions for “Pit Bulls”
- Castalia, Iowa Considers a Breed Ban for “Pit Bulls” and Breed Restrictions for ONE “Pit Bull”
- Omaha, Nebraska Considers Restrictions or a Ban for “Pit Bulls”
- Auburn, California Considers Breed-Specific Restrictions for 5 Breeds Considered to be “Pit Bulls”
- Sioux City, Iowa Considers Banning “Pit Bulls”…Again