BSL in INDEPENDENCE

Pits in the news and info on Breed Specific Legislation.

Postby cheekymunkee » August 30th, 2006, 10:48 am

http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/new ... &qs=1;bp=t

INDEPENDENCE, Mo. -- After weeks of debate, the City Council approved a pit bull ban Monday night, KMBC's Kris Ketz reported.

The ban passed 5-1.

The new ordinance would ban new pit bulls in city limits. Owners of pit bulls already living in Independence will have to register and microchip the dog, and the pit bulls must also be spayed or neutered.


"We're not trying to have anybody get rid of their dogs -- believe me," Mayor Don Reimal said.

According to the new law, owners of pit bulls will also have to carry $300,000 in liability insurance and face stiffer fines and jail time if there is a problem.

The city ramped up its dangerous dog ordinance after three men were mauled by a pack of pit bulls in May.

Alan Hill was one of the men attacked and is still in a hospital.

"Nobody should have to go through what I've had to go through," Hill told KMBC.

He and his wife said they're relieved the ban was approved.

Some animal advocates and pit bull owners have spoken out against the ban, saying breed-specific bans don't work. The ban opponents said the city should focus on bad owners, rather than banning a breed.

Pit bull owner Sherrie Hooker cried when the council passed the ban. She said her dog has done nothing wrong and that she has trained her pit bull to be gentle around small children.

"Nobody else can come around me and tell me that my dogs aren't good, because they are," Hooker said.

Some pit bull owners said they are considering a lawsuit against the city. Others are collecting signatures to force a public vote on the issue, Ketz reported.

Lucy Young was the only City Council member to vote against the ban. She said the ordinance makes it too difficult financially on existing owners.
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

Debby
User avatar
cheekymunkee
I Have Your Grass
 
Posts: 28540
Location: Dallas

Postby sadowner » August 30th, 2006, 12:25 pm

Lucy Young was the only City Council member to vote against the ban. She said the ordinance makes it too difficult financially on existing owners.




Thats what they want, they want the owners to not be able to afford it so they can come and take their dogs.
sadowner
Just Whelped
 
Posts: 60

Postby bahamutt99 » August 30th, 2006, 3:36 pm

Got this information through PAIDO:

Pit bull owners in Independence now have 60 days to comply with the new ordinance which includes...

$150 registration fee ($100 to renew yearly thereafter)

A choke chain or pinch collar

Two leashes (no longer than 4' long)

Mandatory spay/neuter

Microchipping

A wire cage or leather muzzle

A "Dog on premises" sign

$300,000 in insurance -
(Many people have called to increase their homeowners insurance to $300,000 and have been told they will have their policy canceled altogether if they do not get rid of their pit bull ASAP.)

A fully enclosed (roof, floor, & 4 walls) dog run or a fence that is buried 2 feet into the ground and sits 6 feet above ground - (The fencing requirement is not even feasible as reported by fencing companies. The council knew this prior to voting on the ban and made no change.)
~~~
[b]Lindsay
[i]& the [url=http://www.freewebs.com/bahamutt99/index.htm]Gravity Dogs[/url][/i][/b]
User avatar
bahamutt99
Confident Young Bully
 
Posts: 513
Location: west Texas

Postby sadowner » August 30th, 2006, 6:17 pm

And laws like this will continue untill both sides stop the argueing and work towards a result.

One side says ban them they are all evil

The other side says they are misunderstood and misjugded.


IMO neither is being honest.
sadowner
Just Whelped
 
Posts: 60


Return to Pit Bull news and BSL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot]

cron