Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 3/15/2001 1:39:22 PM EDT
Since it doesn't work for guns, why not try it on dogs?


[b]Pit bull control ideas debated
Four proposals include ban, licensing, using microchip implant[/b]

By Neal Thompson
Sun Staff
Originally published March 15, 2001

More than 100 people crammed into a City Hall hearing room last night to debate four different proposals to regulate - and possibly ban - pit bulls in Baltimore.
Most of those attending the lengthy and sometimes raucous hearing of the City Council's Housing, Health and Environment Committee were animal advocates opposed to any legislation that specifically targets pit bulls.

The most poignant testimony came from Kelly Eyring, whose 7-year-old daughter, Kasey, was mauled by a pit bull Jan. 12 while playing with her two sisters outside their grandmother's Southwest Baltimore house.

The dog escaped through a hole in the owner's backyard fence and latched onto Kasey's face, dragging her back and forth across the street as family and neighbors frantically kicked the dog and beat it with sticks and rocks.

"This dog did not let go," Eyring said last night. "I watched my daughter's face get ripped off. ... This dog wanted to kill her."

Neither police nor the dog's owner, Norman Jenkins, were able to free the 7-year-old. The dog finally loosened its bite when Kasey's father repeatedly stabbed it. The girl underwent five hours of surgery to her face that night.

The attack prompted Councilwoman Agnes Welch, a West Baltimore Democrat, to introduce two bills. One would prohibit ownership of pit bulls or other dogs "trained to attack." Violators would face a fine of up to $1,000 and 12 months in jail.

The second, less-restrictive proposal would require a license to own a pit bull and require owners to have liability insurance of at least $25,000.

A third bill, introduced at the request of the city's health commissioner, Dr. Peter L. Beilenson, calls for strict licensing of pit bulls and would require owners to have microchips implanted in their dogs' skin containing information on whether a dog had been spayed or neutered.

Link Posted: 3/15/2001 1:40:42 PM EDT
---------------Part 2---------------

"We think it's a good compromise," Beilenson said before testifying last night. "It doesn't ban any animals, but it encourages responsible ownership."

A fourth bill, which is supported by animal rights advocates, proposes increased funding to enforce Baltimore's laws against vicious dogs.

Beilenson said his department's 17 animal control officers are overburdened and that "there's absolutely no way we can increase our funding for animal control." He said his microchip proposal requires no new money.

The Housing, Health and Environment Committee will consider the legislation later.

Officials estimate that there are 5,000 pit bulls in the city.

City Council President Sheila Dixon said last night that a pit bull ban would probably be difficult to enforce and ineffective.

Prince George's County is finding that its 1997 ban on pit bulls, which led to the euthanization of 2,400 dogs, is largely a failure. A task force has recommended to County Executive Wayne K. Curry that the law be repealed.

Del. Charles R. Boutin, a Harford County Republican, has proposed a statewide ban on pit bills. A hearing in Annapolis on that bill is scheduled for tomorrow.

Animal groups oppose any ban on a specific breed.

"There's no evidence that it works," said Aileen Gabbey, executive director of the Maryland Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, who also testified last night. "Because the issue is really dog bites, not pit bulls."

Gabbey said the city should enforce the laws it has - such as requiring that dogs be leashed or fenced-in - rather than add new ones.
Link Posted: 3/15/2001 2:11:49 PM EDT
I think those damm politicians need to be spayed and neutered.

Link Posted: 3/15/2001 4:07:17 PM EDT
What's next?  How many kids you can have?  Or worse, licensing/testing/registration to become a parent?

(Though in hindsight, the country might benefit from that!)
Link Posted: 3/15/2001 11:34:26 PM EDT
I love showing my dog friends the ban on pitbulls law, waiting for their outrage, and then telling them to replace pitbull with assault weapon.  With a little further explanation I even made a couple converts.

I love the features ban part of the law where it says any dog of mixed breed that resembles one of the identified dogs is banned also.

Where do these people come from?
Link Posted: 3/16/2001 1:06:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2001 1:17:33 AM EDT by Ulysse_Nardin_1846]
Hey my dog was a mixed breed.

Had wolf like clear blue/white eyes.  Does that count?

If so, F'em.

If not, F'em.
Link Posted: 3/16/2001 1:50:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2001 2:00:56 AM EDT by PoppinFresh]
Does this apply to pre-ban dogs as well? I usually affix a bayonet to my Doxen to make him more lethal in combat situations....

Ack! These people need to kill themselves.

But, I'm not bitter. [:)]
Link Posted: 3/16/2001 4:23:19 AM EDT
There is actually a lesson in this:

1.  Dogs are licensed
2.  Dogs are registered
3.  Dogs do have microchip implants (all dogs from the pound have them in Maryland)

So, 3 out of 4 conditions exist now and dogs still attack.

That only leaves BANNING.

So, once they do #1-#3 to guns, that will only leave BANNING
Top Top