7 comments:

by  Anonymous

by  Anonymous 9/04/2009 12:09 PM  |  Flag as abusive  
Florida Statute 767.14 went into effect in 1990 and prohibited counties and cities within Florida from proposing and approving breed specific legislation and did not apply to any local ordinances that were passed prior to the statute. Miami-Dade County is the only county in Florida that currently has breed specific ordinances in effect: their BSL was adopted in 1989.

"767.14 Additional local restrictions authorized.--Nothing in this act shall limit any local government from placing further restrictions or additional requirements on owners of dangerous dogs or developing procedures and criteria for the implementation of this act, provided that no such regulation is specific to breed and that the provisions of this act are not lessened by such additional regulations or requirements. This section shall not apply to any local ordinance adopted prior to October 1, 1990."
---
http://tinyurl.com/lv3lsj

by  Honesty Helps 9/04/2009 6:41 PM  |  Flag as abusive  
California has anti-breed specific laws on the books as far as bans go. However, local municipalities can pass mandatory s/n, etc. And that's why LA now has mandatory spay/neuter but across the board. When this issue comes before City Councils and County Board of Supervisors, they decide to make it across the board rather than put up with the nutters coming down on them. So it turned into a positive thing except that it will be a slower go to get it done. Some places probably won't do it because they are agricultural areas.

by  mrs.poodle 9/05/2009 5:07 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
The only problem I have with this fine system that it is the dog that is being punished. If it is a repeat offender the fine goes up. It should focus on the owner. If the owner is a repeat offender the fine should go up. What is there to stop those owners from getting another aggressive dog after their dog bites?

by  bitbypit 9/05/2009 1:38 PM  |  Flag as abusive  
You point out a great failure with the way dog bites are tracked in the U.S. Bite incidents are typically attached to the dog, not to the owner, even though it's clear that "repeat offenders" make up a significant portion of the dog bite problem. So a man named Jim could have 5 pit bulls each with one bite and only if one of his dog's bites again (becomes a 2-time biter) does Jim get a stiffer penalty. It's unclear why Jim is not being held accountable for all 5 bites when penalized. The Lake County ordinance may take the owner's history into account as well as the dog's, but we would have to look at the details of the ordinance to learn more.

See related blog post:

Great Idea: "Collective" Dog Bite Penalties
http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2008/05/great-idea-collective-dog-bite.html

by  Trigger 9/06/2009 11:40 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
Tracy's medical bills are nearing $100,000. She was attacked March 28. Over 5 months later she is still "changing wound dressings."

THIS IS THE TRUTH ABOUT PIT BULL INJURY.

"Pit-bull bite victim Tracy Lindsey spends roughly $170 a month on medical bandages, gauze and prescription ointments for her mauled left leg, or about $2 more than the fine Lake County slapped on the dogs' owner. "It doesn't seem fair or quite right, does it?" asked the 23-year-old mother of two as she rewrapped the raw wound, which has been slow to heal since the attack on Getford Road five months ago. Her medical bills are nearing $100,000 now, and her cell phone seems to ring constantly. "Debt collectors," she said."
---
http://tinyurl.com/lek7sd

by  Anonymous 9/08/2009 2:38 AM  |  Flag as abusive  
Ahhh...The Pit Bull Community....
Changing America's relationship with dogs, one mauling at a time!

Post a Comment »