April 14th, 2011 by Editor
Editor’s note: If a resident’s dog was attacked by a “pit bull” (though “pit bull” is not a breed) then the issue is a free-roaming or uncontained dog problem, not a breed problem since the same scenario is possible with any breed of dog. Please contact the Manton City Commission here and politely inform them that breed-specific legislation in any form is ineffective, unenforceable, and unconstitutional.
Manton leaders are considering drafting an ordinance that would prohibit city residents from owning or purchasing a Pitbull.
…The idea surfaced during a commission meeting Monday night. A Manton resident complained that his dog had been attacked by a neighbor’s pitbull. He requested that the city consider taking action against the “aggressive breed.”
“We are definitely going to investigate ordinances in other municipalities to see what is out there, how they are worded and whether it is a flat out ban or whether it is a way of containing them,” Hagstrom said.
The mayor said a public meeting will be held before any final decisions are made.
Read this article in its entirety here.
- No Comments »
Posted in "Pit Bull" Hysteria, Breed-Specific Legislation, Constitutional Rights
- Hastings, Nebraska Considers Breed-Specific Ordinance for “Pit Bulls”
- Broward County, Florida and Hollywood, Florida, May Consider Breed-Specific Ordinance in Defiance of Statewide Prohibition of BSL
- Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin to Consider Breed-Specific Ordinance for “Pit Bulls”
- McPherson, Kansas Considers Breed-Specific Ordinance
- Kokomo, Indiana May Consider Breed-Specific Ordinance for “Pit Bulls”