South Dakota’s SB 75 Would Prohibit Breed-Specific Legislation in the State

By Editor
In BSL Prohibition
Jan 24th, 2014
7 Comments
4014 Views

On Thursday, January 23, 2014, the South Dakota Senate heard the first reading of Senate Bill 75 which would prohibit the passage of breed-specific legislation (BSL) within the state of South Dakota.  The bill is short but sweet stating:

FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to prohibit local governments from enacting, maintaining, or enforcing regulations on certain dog breeds.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:   

Section 1. That chapter 40-34 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:   

No local government, as defined in § 6-1-12, may enact, maintain, or enforce any ordinance, policy, resolution, or other enactment that is specific as to the breed or perceived breed of a dog. This section does not impair the right of any local government unit to enact, maintain, or enforce any form of regulation that applies to all dogs.

After its initial reading, SB 75 was sent to the Senate Local Government Committee.  Keep checking here for updates as this bill progresses.

7 Responses to “South Dakota’s SB 75 Would Prohibit Breed-Specific Legislation in the State”

  1. Pamela says:

    Pls no ban on pits. They’re the best!

  2. celeste arzuaggah says:

    EXCELLENT !

  3. Shauna Muztafago says:

    My Pit Bull has never shown aggressive behavior. Please, we must get to the realization that in most every case….it’s the owner that is responsible and typically it’s because the dog itself has been mistreated. A dog is a product of it’s environment. Stand up for these lovely dogs and thank you!!

  4. Mark ValDez says:

    I have registered Alaskan Huskys and my dogs are being accused of being wolves or wolf hybrids by the city of Lead, SD because of the way they look.The city has given me until Aug. 1st to get my dogs out of city limits.Who’s dogs are next? This Bill must go through to protect all South Dakota pet owners.Please contact your state reps and ask them to support SB75.

    Thank You

  5. Hi Mr. Valdez:

    Thank you for coming by and posting. Yes, I am aware of your situation and even wrote a post about it.

    If you wouldn’t mind, could you please provide an update on your case at the following post where I wrote about you?:

    http://www.nopitbullbans.com/2013/09/05/lead-south-dakota-to-redefine-wolf-hybrid-as-wild-problem-all-domesticated-dogs-are-technically-wolf-hybrids/

    I would love to hear how it’s going.

    Thanks.

  6. Karen says:

    I am also aware of Mr. Valdez’s situation and the unjust prosecution he and his dogs have been going through by the city of Lead,SD and the Rapid City Journal.
    I know Mr. Valdez and his dogs. His dogs are very nice and have never shown any aggression.Not even about food!I have also seen the evidence against Mr. Valdez’s dogs and the evidence Mr. Valdez has.The City of Lead’s evidence is based on lies, and Mr. Valdez has evidence that proves without a doubt the Lead City Police Officer is lying and the RC Journal printed nothing but lies about Mr. Valdez and his dogs.In fact the RC Journal reporter would not even speak to Mr. Valdez.I have asked Mr. Valdez to tell his side of the story on this message board. People need to know the truth and not lies! Every pet owner in South Dakota needs to be protected from the abuse of power by city officials.So, I am asking everyone to please contact their State Representatives, and ask them to support SB75.

    Thank You,
    Karen

  7. Hi Karen, and thank you for stopping by and giving a more in-depth explanation about Mr. Valdez’s case.

    Have you ever heard the saying, ironically popular with law enforcement, that criminals aren’t looking for adversaries, they’re looking for victims? That saying frequently springs to mind when I encounter situations like Mr. Valdez’s because if Mr. Valdez was set up to push a wolf hybrid ban in Lead, well, it wouldn’t be the first time. The key, and Mr. Valdez already seems to know this, is to make yourself an adversary, not a victim.

    I don’t for a minute doubt that a city would lie and manufacture or manipulate evidence to push some kind of onerous breed-specific law (after all, corruption is rampant in our country right now). In fact, it very well could be that that is the case with a majority of the BSL ordinance proposals that we see, so I have no doubt about the veracity of Mr. Valdez’s claim. It’s not unheard of either for a small town’s government to go rogue thinking they are isolated from the rest of the country and can therefore make up their own rules and be wholly corrupt in so doing. Power corrupts and absolute power…well you know that old adage.

    And Mr. Valdez makes an excellent point about the chain of custody. Since the sample was out of sight, anyone could’ve tampered with it or simply swapped it out for another. Again, I would encourage folks not familiar with Mr. Valdez’s case to read about it here:

    http://www.nopitbullbans.com/2013/09/05/lead-south-dakota-to-redefine-wolf-hybrid-as-wild-problem-all-domesticated-dogs-are-technically-wolf-hybrids/

    What happened to Mr. Valdez and how the city of Lead is exploiting him and his dogs to push breed-specific legislation is…well…possibly criminal, and just one more reason BSL should no longer exist in South Dakota or anywhere else.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>