June 10th, 2009 by Editor
From The Columbus Dispatch:
Whitehall Councilwoman Jacquelyn Thompson surprised her fellow city council members tonight when she presented a proposal to ban pitbull dogs in the suburb, almost exactly a year after a similar law was rejected.
“I see no other alternative,” Thompson said. “It’s been almost a year and we’re still having attacks. I just feel this city isn’t safe.”
The debate a year ago was one of the most controversial to come before the council in recent years.
Council members accepted Thompson’s proposal in silence, passing the legislation around the table. It will be presented for a possible vote at a later date.
…Singling out breeds commonly referred to as pitbulls has been a hot topic around the nation, and the state House of Representatives is considering legislation that would nix the state law that automatically labels pitbulls as vicious.
…The councilwoman said the compromise devised last July has not worked. It requires the owners of vicious dogs, which legally includes all pitbulls, to put up a 6-foot fence, neuter or spay the animal, implant an ID microchip and buy liability insurance.
City-code enforcement officials are still in the early phases of implementing the law, Service Director Ray Ogden said.
The city sent letters about the new law to 26 pitbull owners in April. Half of them have been cited for still not having tall enough fences as of May 15, he said. Since then the city has identified and warned the owners of five additional pets that had not been registered.
Read this article in its entirety here.
- No Comments »
Posted in Breed-Specific Legislation
- Officers Are Not Immune to “Pitbulls” or Caprice Apparently
- Richland County, South Carolina County Council Considers BSL, Pet Limits
- Payette County, Idaho: BSL Pushed by a Knee-Jerk
- Lakewood, Washington Considers Breed-Specific Ordinance for “Pit Bulls”
- McPherson, Kansas Considers Breed-Specific Ordinance