February 14th, 2013 by Editor

Update from the AKC: S. 178 and HB 5287 have been withdrawn by their respective sponsors.

***

You know the only reason I can think of for bought-off, er I mean lobbied, politicians to keep proposing and pushing long-debunked and now embarrassing “pit bull” urban mythology is because they think the dog lobby is too demoralized and the general public is too stupid to fight their ridiculousness.  How else do you explain Rhode Island Senators Chris Ottiano, David Bates, and Walter Felag, and “Representatives” Raymond Gallison and Kenneth Marshall proposing some of the most asinine breed-specific legislation (BSL) – S. 178  and H. 5287* respectively — the dog lobby may have ever seen!?  The two bills are companion bills, meaning they’re the same, only one’s in the House and one’s in the Senate, and both start off with patently false “legislative findings” like that:

 ”In recent years the state of Rhode Island has experienced a tragic series of incidents in which citizens have been attacked and seriously injured by pitbull dogs…”

No it hasn’t because there is no “breed” “pit bull” ‘in existence and so any time you refer to “pit bulls” as if they were a breed, your statistics are automatically erroneous and therefore worthless.  It doesn’t matter if you go on to define what YOU believe “pit bulls” are in your bill, that doesn’t mean those breeds are what was meant by the original use of the slang moniker “pit bull” in the originating statistics.  Read the rest of this entry »

January 25th, 2013 by Editor

The good news about people doing bad things is that they are getting more foolish.  So when people try to pull a switcheroo and attempt to employ Orwellian newspeak but they’re bad at it, it makes it easier to expose them. (Kind of like have you ever noticed how political correctness is billed as a form of enlightenment but in actuality it’s just an elevated form of censorship?)  I don’t give much credence to “writers” on the Patch, the Examiner (And doesn’t that make them sound legitimate and even authoritative? Yeah, not so much.), or Opposing Views, but this little gem on Opposing Views caught my eye yesterday: Tough BSL Law Protects Pit Bulls in Fayette, MO .  Um, what?

So the latest propaganda piece is that breed-specific legislation (BSL) protects “pit bulls”?  Again, the Orwellian newspeak or double-speak or whatever you want to call it is unmistakeable: Good is bad, and bad is good.  Luckily for us, the newspeakers are bad at newspeaking.

Still, let’s reason this one out just for funsies.  So if I understand correctly, according to Fayette, “breed bans protect ‘pit bulls’”?  The same breed bans that unconstitutionally restrict that non-existent “breed” you call “pit bull,” that result in untold numbers of owner relinquishments thereby burdening the already overrun local shelters and animal controls, that make it impossible to adopt out and find homes for the number of now unwanted “pit bulls” in addition to the number of unwanted “pit bulls” there were before the onerous unconstitutional breed ban was passed, and that make it impossible to own any future “pit bulls” thereby making it a possible death sentence for any “pit bull” within a 50-100 mile radius?  This, according to Fayette, Missouri, is what “protects” “pit bulls”?  Read the rest of this entry »

January 24th, 2013 by Editor

A few years ago, when there was rampant fallout and internet spewing against Michael Vick, I (gulp) argued for Vick’s due process rights — i.e. that he not be tried in the court of public opinion, but rather that he be tried in a court of law.  I even went so far as to (gulp) say that radical animal rights groups would use Vick as a shill to push for their oppressive and unconstitutional legislation.  I got a lot of flak* for that from rabid animal rightists too, but it turns out that those in the dog lobby brave enough to stand up against the animal rightists’ lies were right on both fronts.  Vick was tried by a proper court of law, found guilty, and sent to prison.  Voilà, due process, and the system worked.  And the dog lobby was also right that no sooner had Vick left prison and the radical animal rights group the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) began using Vick as a shill to legitimize themselves as so-called “experts” in combating dog fighting and to push more of their onerous, rights-negating, and oppressive legislation. Read the rest of this entry »

May 23rd, 2011 by Editor

Update: Given that Joplin, Missouri was devastated by a horrific tornado over the weekend and that Joplin neighbors Webb City, it is doubtful that Webb City will be having a council meeting tonight as scheduled.  The breed-specific ordinance will, of course, still be under consideration so please keep vigilant.  Our ongoing prayers go out to those folks in Joplin.  Know that we are thinking about you and praying for you constantly.

Editor’s note: Please contact the Webb City City Council here and politely inform them that “pit bull” is not a breed (their own ordinance defines “pit bull” as a handful of breeds, their mixes, and lookalikes!) meaning statistics on so-called “pit bulls” are massively skewed and therefore meaningless.  Also, please inform them that breed-specific ordinances, whether restrictions or an outright ban, have time and again shown to be ineffective, unenforceable, and unconstitutional.

From The Joplin Globe:

A recent attack by a pit bull on another dog within the city limits has prompted the City Council to take a look at whether to adopt an ordinance banning the breed.

The topic drew comments from residents at the council meeting May 9, and it is expected to be back before the panel May 23….

Read this article in its entirety here.

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.

From UpNorthLive.com:

Manton leaders are considering drafting an ordinance that would prohibit city residents from owning or purchasing a Pitbull.  Read the rest of this entry »

April 14th, 2011 by Editor

Editor’s note: Once again a city points a finger at breed (though “pit bull” is not a breed) instead of identifying the real threat: free-roaming dogs.  Please contact the Xenia City Council as soon as possible and politely inform them that breed-specific legislation (BSL) is ineffective, unenforceable, and unconstitutional. (For those writing letters, consider that Toledo’s BSL was ruled unconstitutional in January 2010 as it went well beyond the purview of state law and violated home-rule doctrine, and legislation currently in the Ohio legislature seeks to remove the archaic dangerous dog designation for “pit bulls” via HB 14.)

From whiotv.com:

An proposed ordinance would outlaw keeping pit bulls as pets inside Xenia city limits.  Xenia City Council will discuss the issue in a special session Thursday night…  Read the rest of this entry »

March 25th, 2011 by Editor

Editor’s note: While our thanks go to Mayor Kuhns for voting against BSL, the rest of the Council appears to have been hellbent on ignoring the overwhelming evidence of the inefficacy of breed-specific legislation, instead subscribing to the long-debunked urban myths, skewed statistics, and junk science of the opposition.  Kirksville itself defines the “pit bull” as three breeds.  Does it not follow that if you define three breeds as if they were one (though “pit bull” is not a breed) that statistics on so-called “pit bulls” would be skewed and therefore meaningless?

And you can see the radical animal rightist mentality of introducing stepping-stone legislation with the end-goal of ending domestic pet ownership has been fully adopted by some in Kirksville.  For instance, the woman that thinks all dogs over 30 pounds should be restricted in true nanny-state style, or the city codes and planning director, who, like the council, still subscribes to the long-debunked urban mythology about the locking jaws or stronger jaws of “pit bulls.”  And is there any excuse for this ignorance when I wrote the Council and excerpted the following from Dr. I. Lehr Brisbin, Ph.D., who is a Senior Research Scientist at the University of Georgia Savannah River Ecology Laboratory and an expert in training, handling, behavior and the anatomy of bulldog breeds?:

“The few studies which have been conducted of the structure of the skulls, mandibles and teeth of [American Pit Bull Terriers] show that, in proportion to their size, their jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology, is no different than that of any [other] breed of dog. There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of ’locking mechanism’ unique to the structure of the jaw and/or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier” (Source: American Dog Breeders Association, “Discover the American Pit Bull Terrier”).

This testimony was affirmed by a court of law.  So does the Kirksville City Council think the court and a Ph.D. lied?  And, if you want to talk about lies, I would be curious to know what other lies the Council was told by the radical animal rightists who pushed BSL with the council.  We already know they told them one.  And again, I’m flabbergasted.  With the Internet at everyone’s disposal, is there any excuse for believing urban myths over science???  Going forward, we will certainly be avoiding Kirksville and will not patronize any of its businesses, and we hope that like in Midwest City, Oklahoma, citizens legally challenge Kirksville’s ordinance.

From HeartlandConnection.com:

The Kirksville City Council voted on Monday night to approve an ordinance that will add pit bulls to the city’s dangerous and vicious animal list.  Read the rest of this entry »

March 25th, 2011 by Editor

Editor’s note: It is unfortunate that there is so much disinformation out there.  City councils and city attorneys are repeatedly misinformed by those with an agenda about the supposed effectiveness and constitutionality of breed-specific legislation (BSL).  The constant stream of repealed BSL nationally and internationally of late illustrates the ineffectiveness of BSL, and when a case against BSL is tried properly and the court is not a kangaroo court, BSL is often found to be unconstitutional.  And, as we so often say here, “pit bull” is not a breed.  As such, statistics that lump together the countless breeds mislabeled “pit bull” are greatly skewed and therefore meaningless.

Please contact the Seward County Commission here and politely inform them that BSL is ineffective, unenforceable, and unconstitutional.

From the Leader & Times:

In February, the Seward County Commission passed a resolution banning the possession of pit bulls in the county. That resolution came 20 years after an original one was passed in 1991.

In the 1991 ordinance was included a grandfather clause that would allow pit bulls in the county to stay in the county, but none could be raised after that.

Monday, after a half hour discussion, the commission voted to revisit the resolution it passed in February. The talk began when county resident Gerald Valentine, who breeds pit bulls, asked the board if the new ordinance could include a grandfather clause similar to the one in the 1991 resolution, which was repealed through the  current law.  Read the rest of this entry »

March 25th, 2011 by Editor

Editor’s note: The Hopkinton incident illustrates the danger, not of a specific breed, but of dogs that are constantly penned, unsocialized, and abused.  If Elkader seeks to be proactive, they should do what Hopkinton didn’t: respond in a timely manner to calls from citizens about possible animal abuse.  Folks want to point a finger at the breeds in the Hopkinton case, but it was the humans that failed that little girl, not the dogs, and certainly not the breed of dogs.

Please contact the Elkader Mayor and City Council via the City Clerk’s info that follows and politely inform them that breed-specific legislation in any form is ineffective, unenforceable, and unconstitutional:

Jennifer K. Cowsert
City Administrator/Clerk
(563)245-2098
elkaderadmin@alpinecom.net

From the Clayton County Register:

The Elkader City Council will be taking another look at the city ordinance governing dog ownership at its next meeting.

Councilman Darryl Koehn said Monday that a concerned citizen approached him about the matter, prompted by a March 5 incident in Hopkinton in which three-year-old Vanessa Elizabeth Husmann was mauled to death in her backyard by two of her grandfather’s Rottweilers.  Read the rest of this entry »

March 25th, 2011 by Editor

Editor’s note: A breed-specific ordinance, whether an outright ban or breed-specific restrictions like Beatrice is considering, is still ineffective, unenforceable, and unconstitutional.  And while DNA tests (which are not at all as reliable as the public has been made to believe and certainly not enough to withstand a legal challenge) have been proposed as a means to enforce “pit bull” bans, how do you DNA test for a “breed” of dog, “pit bull,” which isn’t a breed at all?  And if an ordinance has to parse out a handful of breeds that they define as “pit bull” doesn’t it stand to reason that statistics on so-called “pit bulls” would be skewed since the catch-all slang term “pit bull” must then encompass many breeds instead of just one?

Please contact the Beatrice Mayor and City Council via the City Clerk’s info that follows and politely inform them that breed-specific legislation in any form is ineffective, unenforceable, and unconstitutional:

City Clerk: Linda Koch lkoch@beatrice.ne.gov

400 Ella Street
Beatrice, NE 68310
(402) 228-5200
Fax (402) 228-2312

From the Beatrice Daily Sun:

The Beatrice City Council held its first discussion regarding a proposed new animal ordinance Monday night.

During the hour and 15 minute discussion, the Council heard from multiple members of the community and discussed everything from how to determine the breed of a dog, to if pot-bellied pigs are considered “exotic” animals.  Read the rest of this entry »