Rep. Rodney Moore, of North Carolina, was not anticipating the backlash he received in response to his bill that would restrict multiple breeds of dogs and their mixes.
We have been hearing rumors that he pulled the bill since roughly 72 hours after the bills introduction.
This bill is officially dead, though there is some confusion as to whether this was a voluntary action or an action by the assigned committee. In a news report it is stated the bill died in committee, not that Rep. Moore pulled it.
The breeds of dogs targeted by this bill were Rottweiler, Mastiff, Chow, Presa Canario, wolf hybrid, pit bull (which are defined as Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, and American Pit Bull Terrier).
In the same report Rep. Moore is quote saying, “he wasn’t sure that the breeds designated by the bill as aggressive are ones “with the most incidents,” but he said they “were the most prevalent by the feedback that I’ve gotten.”
Initially, Rep. Moore was saying that he created the list of targeted breeds based off of those restricted by insurance companies. This may be the “feedback” he is referring to.
Regardless of the reason the bill has died, we are pleased with the outcome.
Some people having been expressing support for this legislation, which would require a criminal background check, as well as a class to own the previously mentioned dogs. We feel that a much larger point was being missed in support of the bill. Aside from the fact the breed discrimination is breed discrimination, no matter how you package it, this bill by default would have legally labeled all dogs of those breeds, their mixes and their look a likes as aggressive.
We already know where this road leads. We can look to Ohio as an example. The severity of the restrictions does not matter. Such a label on the state level targeting certain breeds creates an avalanche of local municipalities that create tighter restrictions on the same dogs targeted by state law, as well as creating a dangerous precedent for other states. One can applaud intentions but should never applaud intentions implemented in a thoughtless or reckless way that would create a swath of chaos in its wake.
Pingback: North Carolina bill filed to restrict multiple breeds | Stop BSL
Thank God there are some people that have a heart.
They should take that effort and money to make programs for the public that promotes training and proper, not banning a breed, when these behaviors can be from any dog. Small dogs cause more damages and more bites but they have not been brought into the public’s eye. Preventions is key, make program and bring more of the sports these animals can partake in to the light. Prevention, and not stereotype based on the looks of the dog. With a dog that has power, comes more training to prevent the behaviors, promote these behaviors and working with the public. I’m glad the bill didn’t make it, but put those efforts into more productive ways.