Tag Archives: bite

Sioux City, IA: Group presents data in support of BSL repeal

Sioux City, IA, has had a controversial breed ban in place for several years. Despite local efforts to show city officials that the ban has had no effect on public safety (in fact, some data indicates that dog bites have increased since the ban), it looks like city council is just not interested in repeal. It may take an election and a significant change in council makeup to get them to reconsider.

Facebook page for Sioux Empire Pit Bull Rescue, the group heading up this attempt to change minds in Sioux City: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Sioux-Empire-Pit-Rescue/113194522025974

All alerts for Sioux City, IA, including background information: https://stopbsl.org/?s=%22sioux+city%2C+ia%22

Pit Bull Advocacy Group Tries To Lift Pit Bull Ban

Posted: Aug 22, 2012 5:15 PM CDT
By: Diana Johnsend

[…] The group met with Sioux City Council Member John Fitch today in hopes of getting the whole council to take up the issue again, which doesn’t seem that likely.

“My guess is it’s just additional information. This council is not going to take the issue up again, and I would be surprised if you see it taken up any time soon,” said Fitch.

[…] The group added that they hope the council will take into consideration the stricter pet ownership laws they presented because if anything should be taken away from today’s meeting, they said, it should be they’re working for pet safety and proper ownership.

Full article retrieved 8/24/12 from http://www.kcautv.com/story/19345573/pit-bull-advocacy-group-tries-to-lift-pit-bull-ban

Maryland: Court partially reverses breed-discriminatory decision

The Maryland Court of Appeals has partially reversed their decision in Tracey v Solesky. Whereas the original decision applied strict liability to owners of “pit bulls” and “crossbreed pit bulls” and their landlords, the reversal removes reference to crossbreed and mixed breed pit bulls. However, it leaves intact strict liability for owners and landlords of “pit bulls”—and the term “pit bull” remains undefined by the court.

The court’s reasoning is that the Tracey v Solesky case only involved dogs referred to as “pit bull,” “pit bull dog,” or “pit bull terrier.” The dogs were never referred to as mixes or crossbreeds, and the court can’t issue a decision that involves something that was not the subject of the original case; therefore, the court can only issue a decision about “pit bulls.”

Unfortunately, the decision as it stands still does not define “pit bull,” so it is impossible to know exactly which breeds are included in this ruling. Also, the court did not explain how a non-crossbred (i.e. purebred) “pit bull” could be proven to exist.

The court narrowed the application of the decision to a dog that is called a “pit bull” or “pit bull terrier.” The court’s designation of strict liability therefore only applies to those owners who consistently refer to their dog, or allow others to refer to their dog, as a “pit bull,” “pit bull dog,” or “pit bull terrier”—but the ruling does not apply to owners who call their dog a “mix” or a “cross.” Following the same reasoning that the court used to narrow their decision, the case did not involve, nor did the court name, any specific breed (only a non-breed, “pit bull”); therefore, strict liability might not apply to owners of purebred dogs who avoid shorthand breed references and always use a full breed name to refer to their dog (ergo, their dog is some official breed, not just a “pit bull”).**

**Mind you, I am NOT a lawyer, so don’t take this as legal advice. Rather, you can see how the court’s partial-reversal hasn’t cleared anything up, but instead has left us with an even more confusing mess.

HSUS Maryland has created a very helpful info sheet for Maryland renters with dogs: HSUS Info for Renters and Dog Owners

PBLN had a good discussion about the ruling at the beginning of their 8/21/12 radio show: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/pit-bulletin-legal-news/2012/08/22/austin-no-kill-bsl-dbo-brent-toellner-ryan-clinton-1

I’m sure other organizations will have good discussion of the court’s revised decision and its possible effects over the next few days.

We will be interested to see how the Maryland legislature addresses this mess during the next legislative session, which will begin in January.

You can read the court’s Motion for Reconsideration decision here: http://mdcourts.gov/opinions/coa/2012/53a11re.pdf

Court partly backs off pit bull ruling

Judge admits error in applying decision to cross-bred dogs

By Michael Dresser, The Baltimore Sun
12:08 p.m. EDT, August 21, 2012

Maryland’s highest court on Tuesday partly backed off its widely criticized April decision that pit bulls are inherently dangerous, admitting that it went too far when it applied its ruling to cross-bred dogs.[…]

In a decision written by Judge Alan M. Wilner, the court stood by its finding about purebred pit bulls but canceled its reference to cross-breds.

Wilner, a retired judge who sat with the court on the original case, wrote that having re-read the briefs and the dissent in the case, he now believes the decision to extend the ruling to cross-bred pit bulls was “both gratuitous and erroneous.” […]

Wilner said nothing in the court record showed that Tracey had ever contended the animal was anything other than a pit bull terrier. […]

Full article retrieved 8/21/12 from http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-pit-bull-decision-20120821,0,4806033.story

Taylor, MI: Residents push for BSL

Some residents of Taylor, MI, are asking the city to pass BSL or a breed ban.

The news article below hints that this may be a more news media-driven issue than anything, especially when the news outlet says “Online, two posts on The News-Herald Newspapers’ Facebook page netted 86 comments as of Friday…” Yes, folks, the news media is counting, and they know that controversy drives traffic, which drives advertising revenue. Expect them to keep stirring the pot.

Residents and locals, please respectfully and calmly contact the city council and let them know that you would not support any breed-specific measures.
Contact info for city council:
23555 Goddard Road, Taylor, MI 48180
Phone: (734) 374-1320
Fax: (734) 374-1305
cburke4taylor@gmail.com; brandanaj@comcast.net; jackiemolner@comcast.net; johnedelo@aol.com; suefitzpatrick311@gmail.com; dstaple417@aol.com; r_sollars@kutritemfg.com

TAYLOR: Pit bull attack sparks debate over safety of the breed

Published: Friday, June 08, 2012
By David Komer

TAYLOR — [… Taylor resident Elizabeth] Smith has since requested toughening city ordinances, such as requiring registration or muzzles for specific breeds like pit bulls.

[…] “People need to know they are bred for one thing,” [Taylor resident Mark] Gersky said. “(Killing) is in their blood.” […]

Full article retrieved 6/9/12 from http://www.thenewsherald.com/articles/2012/06/08/news/doc4fd25b88ae10b402170226.txt?viewmode=fullstory

Roswell, NM: Petition to ban certain breeds from city parks

In Roswell, NM, some residents are asking for a ban on all dogs from city parks, others are asking for a ban only on certain breeds, and others are against any kind of dog ban in the parks.

Residents of Roswell may wish to reach out to city leaders to ensure that whatever decision they make, it is not breed-specific.
City council contact info: http://www.roswellhome.net/

Deadly attack sparks dog ban discussion

Dogs okay in city parks unless events ban them

Published : Wednesday, 06 Jun 2012, 5:17 PM MDT
Gabrielle Burkhart
ROSWELL, N.M. (KRQE) – […] The owners of the pomeranian said they’re working on getting together a petition to propose a city ordinance that would ban certain dog breeds, such as pit bulls and rottweilers from public parks.

Full article retrieved 6/9/12 from http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/local/southeast/deadly-attack-sparks-dog-ban-discussion

Carmi, IL: Residents ask for BSL

Illinois state law prohibits municipalities from passing BSL, so Carmi cannot legally pass BSL or a breed ban despite residents’ requests. City officials are aware of this. (Illinois “home rule” municipalities can pass BSL despite state law, but Carmi is not a “home rule” city.)

Residents and locals may wish to get involved in Carmi to help city officials make the community safer and more educated about dog behavior and responsible dog ownership.

Dog owners urged to obey leash laws

By Braden Willis, Carmi Times
Posted May 24, 2012 @ 10:03 AM

[…] The attacking dog was a pit bull breed and Port acknowledged at Monday’s meeting there has been a call from neighbors in that area for the council to enact breed-specific prohibitions against pit bulls.

The mayor said such an ordinance has been considered, but the council learned state law prohibits breed-specific prohibitions. […]

Full article retrieved 5/25/12 from http://www.carmitimes.com/news/x1898611450/City-realizes-34K-profit-despite-losses

Wagmatcook, NS, Canada: Whispers of BSL

Back in January, Wagmatcook First Nation reserve band council had a “pit bull” ban on their agenda. That effort did not succeed, but after a recent dog bite(involving a dog that was tethered), some in the community are apparently calling for a breed ban again.

Wagmatcook First Nation is a reserve. This is all the contact information I have.

Council of Wagmatcook Band, P.O. Box 30001, Wagmatcook, NS B0E 3N0
Chief Norman Bernard, Wagmatcook First Nation
Tribal Council: Union of Nova Scotia Indians, P.O. Box 237 Baddeck, NS B0E 1B0
Phone: (902) 295-2598
Fax: (902) 295-3398

Pit bull attacks Cape Breton woman

New calls to ban the breed on Wagmatcook reserve

CBC News Posted: May 18, 2012 7:47 PM AT

[…] The January attack sparked calls for a ban on pit bulls on the reserve. Peck seconded that call, adding there are a lot of them in the community.

“They should ban the dogs around here, because the owners are making them more aggressive. They’re already aggressive anyway,” she said. […]

Full article retrieved 5/20/12 from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2012/05/18/ns-woman-bit-pitbull.html

All alerts for Wagmatcook: https://stopbsl.org/?s=wagmatcook


Bloomington, IL: City may consider BSL

Although Illinois state law prohibits municipalities from passing BSL, Bloomington is a “home rule” city and therefore does not have to follow the state law.

We are seeing, more frequently, the statement that BSL is necessary because “responsible dog owners are in the minority.” (Particularly, responsible owners of commonly targeted breeds.) There is no scientific data to back up this assertion—to my knowledge there haven’t been any studies done on this at all. It is purely myth and stereotype.

Advocates, please be aware of the generalizations and stereotypes you’re using when talking about dog owners. In some cases, as we see in Bloomington, this stereotype helps officials feel justified in considering or passing BSL.

Contact information for Bloomington, IL officials
City of Bloomington, 109 E. Olive St, Bloomington, IL 61701
Ph (309) 434-2240
The City Council meets on the 2nd and 4th Mondays every month at 7:00 PM in the City Hall Council Chambers on the 2nd Level. Next council meeting: May 28.

After attack, city to look at rules for dogs

By: Ryan Denham

BLOOMINGTON – Aldermen may revisit tougher rules for dangerous pit bulls and their owners after a recent attack on Bloomington’s west side.

[…] Bernie Uszcienski said it’s time for the city to consider stiffer penalties for vicious dog owners. He said he’s observed more pit bulls – and more of them controlled by irresponsible owners – in his neighborhood and citywide.

“I feel bad for the ones that are certainly responsible owners,” Uszcienski said. “But in my opinion, they are certainly far in the minority.”

Ward 6 Karen Schmidt said she wants to know if the 2006 change has made a difference, and what the impact has been in other communities that have banned pit bulls, such as Denver. (That ban was upheld in court, city officials say.) […]

Full article retrieved 5/16/12 from http://wjbc.com/after-attack-city-to-look-at-rules-for-dogs/