Hays commission weighs 'dangerous' label, but no outright ban, for pit bulls
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Fox4KC.
#1 Nov 10, 2009
I am pleased that Hayes is not considering an outright ban on the bully breeds, but I do have a question for you.
I spend my vacations traveling in various small Kansas towns doing genealogical research in cemeteries, libraries, and courthouses. I am unable to travel without my medical assistance dog, who happens to be a "pit bull". She is not able to perform the tasks that she has been trained to help me with if she is wearing a muzzle.
How will this affect us? Interfering with the performance of a service dog is a violation of the ADA law in all 50 states.
It is my opinion that strict enforcement of existing leash laws, with graduated penalties for repeat offenders is a far more effective method of avoiding animal bites. Owners of individual dogs that have demonstrated a propensity for aggression should have requirements for secure housing and penalties for failure to protect the public, be the animal a toy poodle or an arctic wolf.
Convicted felons need to have restrictions on the type of dog they are allowed to own, and their animals must be spayed/neutered. Criminals will always find a breed of dog to exploit. This generation has chosen the pit bull. A few years ago it was the rottweiler, prior to that it was the German shepherd and the doberman. The current statistics indicate a move toward the American bulldog, which is often indistinguishable from the American pit bull terrier, but does not have the inbred characteristic of not being human aggressive.
I worked many years in animal control prior to becoming disabled, and never once was bitten by a pit bull, even those we rescued from fighting rings. I helped to draft a strong dangerous dog ordinance that was both effective and non-breed specific. If I can help in any way, I will be happy to do so.
#2 Nov 11, 2009
There is no scientific evidence that one kind of a dog is more likely to injure a human being than another kind of a dog. None. Consequently, because they are not based upon any scientific facts, breed specific regulations, declarations of dangerousness and so on have never made any community safer anywhere in the world they have been tried. The Commissioners are wasting their time and public resources on these kinds of regulations.
Dogs cannot be characterized apart from human beings. If a safer community is the goal, humane care, custody and control of all dogs, regardless of breed or type, is the answer.
Which is to say, build a responsible pet owner community.
The City Commissioners should set these breed rules aside, and think instead about how Hays can build a community of responsible pet owners.
#3 Nov 16, 2009
Good...Pitbulls are not truly domesticated animals and are unpredictable.
I would never trust a pit around my children no matter how docile he seems..
#4 Jul 27, 2010
My husband and I adopted an abandonded 9-12 month female pit bull that was taken to a Vet office in Alma Nebraska in June. We were trying to do the "right and proper thing", had her microchipped and then got a city tag for her immediately in Russell. When the city animal control officer picked up the tag registration at our local Vet office the trouble began! We were SERVED with papers informing us of a "dangerous dog" ordinance. The ordinance goes so far as to say that the dog has to be muzzled when in our own fenced back yard and we have to be in visual/hearing distance of the dog at all times when outdoors. We don't have a problem with other provisions of the ordinance, including insurance of $100,000 against potential of dog bite to innocent townspeople. We do object to the "dangerous dog" label. She is a happy silly, full body wag dog. For a dog that was obviously physically abused she is eager to please and understands boundaries. She has manners and is easily walked on a leash/harness. I don't see any reason to put a muzzle on her. After my husband's brother and wife met her they declared there was one problem with her...She can't control her LICKER. She has not shown any signs of aggression to another animal or person.(We also have a 4yr old adopted male mini schnauzer.) We have learned thru other members of the town that they were advised by the Animal Control officer to register their dogs as mixed breeds so they wouldn't face this city ordinance as we have. I have clients of my own business with pit bulls that have never chipped and registered their dogs because of this city ordinance. How do we fight this? We want the stigma removed. We have been told that the city ordinance is up for review this year...that does nothing for us right now! Any ideas of what to say, do and not do at the upcoming hearing? All help is appreciated!
Add your comments below
|Demonstrators show support for Weber||Sep '16||rmorgan||1|
|Dairy Queen (Jul '16)||Jul '16||guest||2|
|Hispanic College Institute helps students get t... (Jun '16)||Jun '16||Paddling has its ...||1|
|Plainville police (Jun '16)||Jun '16||Concernedcitizen||1|
|Theresia Ostrom (Apr '16)||Apr '16||Concern citizens||1|
|Student safety a concern with concealed carry, ... (Mar '16)||Mar '16||Prep-for-Dep||6|
|Debate: Gay Marriage - Hays, KS (Jan '12)||Mar '16||jam||20|
Find what you want!
Search Hays Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC