Pit bull law tossed out in Reading
A Pennsylvania appeals court has muzzled an out-of-control Reading city ordinance that required pit bulls -- and other dogs deemed "dangerous" on the basis of their breed -- be subject to restrictions that included being kept on three-foot leashes when outside the home.
The divided Commonwealth Court decision sided with two pit-bull owners -- Stacie Stankiewicz and Kenneth Steeves Sr. -- who have been fighting the city ordinance since it passed eight years ago.
The court threw out the law because it conflicted with, and was preempted by, a state law defining what makes a dog "dangerous." The state law is not "breed specific."
The Reading ordinance was among the strictest and most backward in the country, defining aggressive dogs as those that are -- even partly -- of a breed that accounted for 40 percent or more of dog-bite incidents reported in the city during the prior year. It required such dogs, when outside the home, be muzzled and kept on a leash shorter than three feet, and required their owners to pay higher fees to register them.
Violation of the ordinance was punishable with fines of up to $1,000 or 30 days in jail.
"The absurdity was that dangerous dog breeds changed from year to year, based on the dog-bite statistics -- that was the crux of the lawsuit," Al Kauffman, attorney for plaintiffs, said in an Associated Press account of the ruling.
Pennsylvania's state Dog Law classifies as "dangerous" an individual dog that has attacked someone without provocation, one that killed or badly injured a domestic animal while off the dog owner's property, or one that has been used to commit a crime.
Comments
This is great news for those of us who oppose BSL. There need to be more of those like in the article who oppose this type of legislation.
Posted by: Ty Brown | February 28, 2008 11:44 AM
This will make the dog fighters and breeders happy.
They don't want any kind of law that will "restrict" them from overbreeding these dogs in huge numbers, torturing them, and dumping them.
It is big money!
Unfortunately the Dangerous Dog Law as it is does not PREVENT problems. The law only takes effect after someone has gotten mauled or killed. Tough luck for that adult or child or pet.
And every time a pit bull is involved in one of these incidents, their reputation sinks lower and lower.
Wouldn't it make more sense for the benefit of the public and the dogs to PREVENT these incidents so pit bulls will not be hated as they are right now?
Good laws that regulate care of pit bulls not only reduce maulings and deaths, it helps the DOGS.
And it is certainly time to get these pit bull breeders licensed and inspected.
Maybe some day the courts and legislators won't let themselves get duped by the dog fighting and breeding lobby.
Posted by: Rob | February 28, 2008 9:30 PM
By the way, dog fighters and breeders are chattering on their forums about how happy they are about this.
Gee, thanks, Al Kauffman. Not.
One of the biggest dog fighter/breeders in the country that was busted for dogfighting has lots of "anti BSL" stuff on his website.
Always sad to see naive doggie lovers help out that lobby.
No wonder the situation for pit bulls just keeps getting worse.
Posted by: Rob | February 28, 2008 9:39 PM
Whenever someone argues for banning a given breed, or breed specific legislation, I like to refer them here:
http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/nov00/s111500c.asp
Yes, the AVMA is better qualified than you even if a pit DID once eat your neighbour.
And the pits reputation sinking lower and lower? It'll come back. Just like German Shepherds, Rottweilers and Dobermans rebounded after they each spent their decade as the media's evil-boogeyman-dog.
Posted by: Pat | February 29, 2008 1:02 AM
It's just sad to still see this as an issue. bad people breed bad dogs. It does not take a genius to see that these animals are not going anywhere. I think that the ruling was just, and that everyone should not have to pay for a few idiots who cannot control their pet/companion. and as far as licensing and inspecting breeders, i just wish everyone would mind their business and let people live as they please. Thats what makes us the great U.S.A. The ability to live as we want... Dog fighters should be flogged and impaled.
Posted by: kendrell | March 26, 2008 10:33 AM
Im impressed with the courts decision.. This type of outcome doesn't occur too frequently. The argument that Pit-Bull Terriers are "dangerous" dogs compared to other breeds will be challenged far into the future. It is a simple - nature vs. nurture - argument. It is not about the breed, it is about the owner. While leash laws are not at all a hardship (for any breed) and should be implemented, to some extent, for all areas as a regard to common courtesy; pin-pointing the Pit Bull breed simply because of their muscular stature could be dramatically compared to arresting all individuals with tattoos in attempts to control the crime issue of an area. Pit-Bull Terriers are affectionate, loving dogs who derive the majority of their aggression from their loyalty and only attack if they, or their master, are in danger. It is inevitably true that there are individuals among us that will take advantage of their pet's loyalty with a sick mind and pervertedly manipulate that otherwise angelic trait into a 'do as your told' attitude and fight these muscular canines. Who should be punished for this? Finally, statistics show that 1 person out of every 1000 people in the world is a murderer. Roughly 1 Pit bull out of 2,120,000 Pits in the world has attacked a human or another animal. So - should we be trying to control the Pits? or the People?
Posted by: Meg G | April 16, 2008 11:23 AM