Monday, October 31, 2005

Fight or Flight? YOU Decide!

If someone forcibly breaks into your home or car, should the law require that you turn your back and run away? If you don’t try to run away, then if you fight back, by shooting a gun, then YOU go to jail.

Well, that’s the law in many (most?) US states. Can you imagine being forced to flee an assailant? Is running away always the best way to deal with a threat? In a split second, you could be making a decision that could end your life.

You should have a choice, not be forced into flight. It doesn’t work that way in the animal kingdom. The option is FLIGHT or FIGHT… not just flight.

If I was a bad guy, and I knew you had to flee, then I could set you up to do just that… and be sure to kill you.

I like the Florida Castle Doctrine…

If someone forcibly breaks into your home or car, you can assume they mean you great bodily harm or death…

You can stand your ground and fight back…

And if the bad guy gets hurt, he can’t sue you in court, and you won’t go to jail.

Shouldn’t dog bite laws work the same way as the Florida Castle Doctrine? I think so. Dog owners have been SUED SUCCESSFULLY by criminals who forcibly broke into their homes, the dogs attacked, the criminals were injured... and they sued the owners for use of "excessive force"... and won! (Is this world messed up or what?)

Are you starting to see why gun laws and dog laws have so much in common?

Who Are Your Friends?

It is interesting to ponder the thoughts of the fanatics.

One major philosophy of the animal rights nutcases is as follows:

Animal rights activists, by contrast, generally invoke Jeremy Bentham's concept of suffering: "The question is not, 'Can they reason?' nor 'Can they talk?' but 'Can they suffer?'" Under this approach, it's the ability to feel subjective pain that determines the presence of rights.

This sort of immoral and amoral thinking goes against reality and the moral pillars of our society.

Animal rights is anti-logic, anti-capitalist, anti-religious, and anti-nature.

The animal rights movement is a back door for far left, wacko communists to strip us of our humanity, and to impose upon us a socialist/ communist world. Don’t believe me? Note who they ally themselves with (anarchists, enviro-wackos, etc.) , and ask yourself if you’d have anything to do with their political “friends”.

The following are comments for search engines, for Paws To Play doggie daycare, Sam Basso, Dawn Kamp,, , , Sam The Dog Trainer - Kennel, kennel management, dog kennel, kennels, dog crates, cat, kitty, litter, kitty litter, dog boarding, boarding kennel, sam basso, boarding kennels, doggie daycare, crate, dog crate, sam the dog guy, sam the dog man, dog training, puppy training, dog behavior, dog obedience, dog training collars, clicker training, dog obedience training, dog training tips, obedience training, dog trainer, behavior, cat behavior, behavior modification, child behavior, animal behavior, behavior management, applied behavior analysis, dog training schools, a dog, animal trainers, dog obedience schools, aggression, potty training, house training, peeing, pooping, pottying, obedience schools, dog training, puppy training, dog behavior, dog obedience, dog training collars, clicker training, dog obedience training, dog training tips, obedience training, dog trainer, behavior, cat behavior, Crate training, radio fence, invisible fence, hidden fence, puppy potty training, raising a puppy, puppy training tips, training your puppy, gentle leader, pinch collar, pinch collars, prong collar, prong collars, spiked collar, choke chain, chain collar, correction collar, Haltie collar, dog food, leashes, dog leash, ask the vet, vet, dog bed, dog crate, dog kennel, dog boarding, Crate training, radio fence, invisible fence, hidden fence, puppy potty training, raising a puppy, puppy training tips, training your puppy, gentle leader, pinch collar, pinch collars, prong collar, prong collars, spiked collar, choke chain, chain collar, correction collar, Haltie collar, dog food, leashes, dog leash, ask the vet, vet, dog bed, dog crate, dog kennel, dog boarding, Crate training, radio fence, invisible fence, hidden fence, puppy potty training, raising a puppy, puppy training tips, training your puppy, gentle leader, pinch collar, pinch collars, prong collar, prong collars, spiked collar, choke chain, chain collar, correction collar, Haltie collar, dog food, leashes, dog leash, ask the vet, vet, dog bed, dog crate, dog kennel, dog boarding, Crate training, radio fence, invisible fence, hidden fence, puppy potty training, raising a puppy, puppy training tips, training your puppy, gentle leader, pinch collar, pinch collars, prong collar, prong collars, spiked collar, choke chain, chain collar, correction collar, Haltie collar, dog food, leashes, dog leash, ask the vet, vet, dog bed, dog crate, dog kennel, dog boarding, pet store, pet supplies, veterinarian, separation anxiety, barking, growling, dominance, submission, submissive, submissive urination, excitement urination, seminars, protection dog, attack dog, protection training, k9, police, police dog, drug detection, drug detection dog, sniffer dog, dog whisperer, dog psychic, cattle dog, herding dog, hunting dog, guard dog, pet dog, family dog, hound dog, sighthound, sight hound, scent hound, scenthound, tracking, footstep tracking, Armin Winkler, Schutzhund, KNPV, Ring Sport, choosing a dog, choosing a breeder, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Avondale, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Albany, Albuquerque, Anchorage, Apache Junction, Asheville, Alderwood Manor, Atlanta, Atlantic City, Austin, Baltimore, Baton Rouge, Bellevue, Billings, Birmingham, Bismarck, Boise, Boston, Bothell, Brier, Bridgeport, Buckley, Buffalo, Burien, Burlington, Carefree, Caribou, Casper, Chandler, Charleston, Charleston, Charlotte, Cheyenne, Chicago, Cleveland, Clyde Hill, Columbia, Columbus, Concord, Dallas, Ft. Worth, Denver, Des Moines, Detroit, Dodge City, Duluth, Edmonds, El, Paso, Fairbanks, Fargo, Fountain Hills, Gilbert, Glendale, Grand Junction, Grand Rapids, Hartford, Helena, Honolulu, Houston, Hunts Point, Indianapolis, Issaquah, Jackson, Jacksonville, Juneau, Kansas City, Kenmore, Kent, King County, Kirkland, Knoxville, Las Vegas, Lexington, Little, Rock, Long Beach, Los, Angeles, Louisville, Lynnwood, Madison, Maple Valley, Maricopa, Medina, Memphis, Mercer Island, Mesa, Miami, Mill Creek, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Mobile, Montgomery, Mountlake Terrace, Mt. Washington, Nashville, Newark, Newcastle, New Orleans, New York, Norfolk, Normandy Park, Oklahoma City, Olympia, Omaha, Pacific Northwest, Paradise Valley, Peoria, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Portland, Providence, Puget Sound, Raleigh, Redmond, Reno, Renton, Richmond, Richmond Beach, Richmond Highlands, Roswell, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, Sammamish, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Savannah, Scottsdale, Seatac, Seattle, Shoreline, Skyway, Snohomish, Snohomish County, Tacoma, Tempe, Sioux Falls, Spokane, Springfield, St Louis, Sun City, Surprise, Tampa, Toledo, Tucson, Tukwila, Tulsa, Vero Beach, Washington, Wichita, Wilmington, Woodway, Agility, Affenpinscher, Afghan, Agility Trials, Age, Aggressive tendencies, Ainu, Airedale, Akbash, Akita, Alapaha, Alaskan Malamute, Allergy, Alsasian, Black and Tan Coonhound, American Bulldog, Cocker Spaniel, American Eskimo, American Foxhound, American Hairless Terrier, American Kennel Club, AKC, American Pit Bull, American Staffordshire Terrier, Anal Sac, Anatolian Shepherd, Angulation, Animal Baiting, Animal Bites, Appenzeller, Arctic Fox, Arctic Husky, Ardennes Cattle Dog, Argentinean Mastiff, Ariege Pointer, Argeois, Armant, Arthritis, Artificial Insemination, Aryan Molossus, ASCOB, ASPCA, Assistance Dogs, Atlas Sheepdog, Attack Dog, Australian Cattle Dog, Australian Greyhound, Australian Kelpie, Australian National Kennel Council, Australian Queensland Heeler, Australian Shepherd, Australian Silky Terrier, Australian Terrier, Austrian Brandlbracke, Austrian Hound, Austrian Shorthaired Pinscher, Azara's fox, AVMA, Auvergne Pointer, Azawakh, Azores Cattle Dog, baby teeth, backing, Baganda Hunting Dog, Bagirmi Dog, Bakhund, Balaeric Hound, Balkan Hound, Balkanski Gonic, Baluchi Hound, Bandog, Bangara Mastiff, Banjara Greyhound, Bantu Dog, Barbet, Barking, Barukhzy Hound, Basenji, Basque Shepherd, Basset, Basset Artesian Normand, Basset Fauve de Bretagne, Basset Hound, Batak Spitz, Bathing, Battak, Bavarian Mountain Hound, Bavarian Schweisshund, Bayrischer Gebirgsschweisshund, Beagle, Beagle field trials, Beagle Harrier, Beagling, Beard, Bearded Collie, Beauceron, Bedding, Bedlington Terrier, Bedouin Shepherd, Behavior modification, Belgian Cattle Dog, Belgian Griffon, Belgian Malinois, Belgian Mastiff, Belgian Sheepdog, Groenendael, Laekenois, Malinois, Tervuren, Shorthaired Pointer, Belton, Bench show, bench show committee, Bengal fox, Bergamaschi, Bergamasco, Bergamese Shepherd, Gerger Polonais de Valee, Berger, Berger de Castro Laboreiro, Berger da Serra de Estrela, Berger de Beauce, Berger de Brie, Berger de Savoy, Berger des Pyrenees a Face Rase, Berger du Languedoc, Berger Picard, Berge Polonais de Vallee, Bergers des Pyrenees, Berner Laufhund, Neiderlaufhund, Sennenhund, Bernese Hound, Bernese Scenthound, Bernese Mountain Dog, Bertillon, Best in Group, Best in Show, Best in Specialty Show, Best of Breed, Best of Opposite Sex, Best of Winners, Bhotia, BIS, BISS, Bichon, Bichon a Poil Frise, Bichon Bolognese, Bichon Frise, Bichon Havanais, Bichon Maltaise, Bichon Tenerife, Bicolor, Big n' Blue, Billet, Billy, Bird dog field trials, Bird Dogs, Bird work, birdy, bitch, bite, bite types, Black and Tan Terrier, Black Fell Terrier, Black Forest Hound, Black Mouth Cur, Black Norwegian Elkhound, Black Russian Terrier, Black Spaniel, Black Tongue, Blanket Finish, Blenheim, Bleu d'Auvergne, Blue de Gascogne, blind retrieve, bloat, Bloodhound, Blue and Tan Manchester Terrier, Blue belton, blue eye, Blue Gascony Basset, Blue Heeler, Blue Lacy, Blue merle, Blue Paul, Blue Picardy Spaniel, Blue tick, Bluetick Coonhound, Blue tongue, BOB, BOS, BOW, boarding kennels, bobtail, Bohemian Terrier, Bolognese, bones, Bordeaux dog, Border Collie, Border Terrier, boredom, Borzoi, Bosanski Barak, Bosnian Hound, Bosnian Roughhaired Hound, Boston Terrier, Boulegogue Francais, Bouncer, Bourbonnais Pointer, Bouvier, Bouvier Bernois, Bouvier des Ardennes, Bouvier des Flanders, box buster, box broken, Boxer, Boykin Spaniel, Bracco Italiano, Bracco Navarrone, Brace, brace mate, Braco Carlos VIII, Braco Navarro, Braque Belge, Braque Dupuy, Braque d'Ariege, Braque d'Auvergne, Braque de Toulouse, Braque du Bourbonnais, Braque Francais de Grande Taille, Baque Francais de Petite Taille, Braque Saint Germain, Brasilian Molosser, Brazilian Greyhound, Brazilian Mastiff, Brazilian Terrier, breaking, breed, breeding, breed standard, Briard, bridle, Briquet, Briquet Griffon Vendeen, Brittany, Brittany Spaniel, Bruno de Jura, Bruno Jura Laufhund, Brussels Griffon, Buhund, Bull Terrier, Bulldog, bullbaiting, bullenbeisser, Bullmastiff, Burmese wild dog, bush dog, Byelorussian Ovtcharka, Ca, Ca de Bestiar, Ca de Bou, Ca Eivissencs, cage dryer, Cairn Terrier, Cameroons Dog, Canaan Dog, Canadian Eskimo Dog, Canadian Kennel Club, CKC, Canary Dog, Cane Corso, Cane de Pastore Bergamasco, Cane de Pastore dell' Italia Centrale, Cane de Pastore Maremmano Abruzzese, Cane di Macellaio, Caniche, Canidae, Canine, canine behavior, canis familiaris, cannonballing, cao da Serra da Estrella, Cao da Serra de Aires, Cao de Agua, Cao de Castro Laboreiro, Cao de Fila, Cao de Fila de S. Miguel, Cape fox, car travel, Cardigan Welsh Corgi, Carinthian Brandlbracke, carnivorous, Carolina Dog, Carpathian Sheepdog, cart training, castration, Castro Laboreiro Sheepdog, cat bite, Catahoula Leopard Dog, Catahoula Cur, Catahoula hog dog, Catalan Sheepdog, catch dog, cattle dog, Caucasian Ovtcharka, Caucasian Sheepdog, Cavalier King Charles Spaniel, CD, CDX, Cesky Fousek, Cesky Terrier, Cevennes Shepherd, chaining, chain gang, chaining out, challenge certificate, Chambray, champion, character, Charnique, Chart Polski, chasing, check cord, Chesapeake Bay Retriever, Chien Canne, Chien Courant de Bosnie a Poil Dur, Chien d'Artois, Chien de Berger Belge, Chien de Berger Egyptian, Chien de l'Atlas, Chien de Montagnes des Pyrenees, Chien de Pays, Chien de St. Hubert, Chien de Trait, Chien des Garrigues, Chien d'ours de Tahltan, Chien Francais, Chien Francais Blanc et Noir, Chien Francais Blanc et Orange, Chien Francais Tricolore, Chien Loup, Chihuahua, children and dogs, kids and dogs, girls and dogs, boys and dogs, Chinese Crested, Chinese Fighting Dog, Chinese Greyhound, Chinese Hound, Chinese Shar Pei, Chinook, Chippiparai, choke collar, choke chain, Chortaj, Chow, Chow Chow, Chrysanthemum Dog, Cirneco dell'Etna, Clumber Spaniel, Clydesdale Terrier, COCA, Cocker Spaniel, cold nose, wet nose, warm nose, collar, buckle collar, Collie, Companion dog, Compiegne Pointer, Congo Dog, Congo Pygmy Bush Dog, Continental Toy Spaniel, Cornish Greyhound, Coton de Tulear, Coursing, Cowley Terrier, coyote, Croatian sheepdog, crossbred, crossbreeding, backcross, outcross, Cuban Mastiff, Cumberland Sheepdog, cur, Curly Coated Retriever, cynology, Czech Coarsehaired Pointer, Czesky Fousek, Czesky Terrier, Dachbracke, Dachshund, Dalmatian, Dandie Dinmot Terrier, Danish Broholmer, Danish Dachbracke, Danish Farm Dog, death, debarking, Deerhound, Deutsche Bracke, Deutsche Dogge, Deutshce Sauerlandbracke, Deutsche Schferhund, Deutsch Drahthaariger Vorstehhund, Deutscher Grosspitz, Deutscher Jagdterrier, Deutshher Klienspitz, Deutscher Kurzhaariger Vorstehhund, Deutscher Langhhriger Vorstehhund, Duetscher Mittelspitz, Deutscher Spitz, Deutscher Stichelhaariger Vorstehhund, Duetscher Wachtelhund, Dhangari Dog, Dingo, Doberman, Dobermann, Doberman Pinscher, dog house, dog food, dog bed, dog racing, dogo, Dogo Aleman, Dogo Argentino, Argentinean Dogo, Dogue de Bordeaux, French mastiff, draft dog, draghound, drahthaar, Drentse Patrijshond, Drever, drooling, Drotszonu Magyar Vizsla, Drover, Dunker, Dutch Shepherd, Dutch Smoushond, Dutch spaniel, Dutch Steenbrak, East Siberian Laika, Elizabethan collar, Elterwater Terrier, English Cocker Spaniel, English Beagle, English Bulldog, English Coonhound, English Foxhound, English Greyhound, English Mastiff, English Pointer, English Setter, English Shepherd, English Springer Spaniel, English Toy Spaniel, English Toy Terrier, English Water Spaniel, Entelbuch Mountain Dog, Entelbucher, Entelbucher Sennenund, Epagneul, Epagneul Bleu de Picardie, Epagneul Francais, Epagneul Picard, Epagneul Pont Audemer, Eskimo Dog, Estonian Hound, Estrala Mountain Dog, FCI, Federation Cynologique Internationale, field champion, Field Spaniel, fighting dogs, dog fighting, Fila Brasileiro, Fila da Terceiro, Finnish Hound, Finnish Lapphund, Finnish Spitz, Flat Coated Retriever, flock guard, French Bulldog, Gascon Saiintongeois, German Longhaired Pointer, German Shepherd, German Shorthaired Pointer, German Spitzen, German Wirehaired Pointer, giant breed, Giant Schnauzer, Golden Retriever, Gordon Setter, Great Dane, Great Pyrenees, Greater Swiss Mountain Dog, Greek Harehound, Greek Sheepdog, Greenland Dog, Grayhound, Greyhound, Griffon Fauve de Bretagne, Griffon Nivernais, Griffon Vendeen, grooming, groomers, guard dog, gundog, Hamiltonstovare, Hanoverian Hound, harness, Harrier, Havanese, Hawaiian Poi Dog, herding dog, herding group, sporting group, Hovawart, Ibizan Hound, ICF, International Canine Federation, Iceland dog, inbreeding, crossbreeding, line breeding, Inca Hairless Dog, Irish Red and White Setter, Irish Setter, Irish Terrier, Irish Water Spaniel, Irish Wolfhound, Istrian Hound, Italian Greyhound, Jack Russell Terrier, Jackal, Jagdgriffon, Japanese Akita, Japanese Chin, Japanese Spitz, Japanese Terrier, Japanese Tosa, Jindo, K9, K-9, Kai Dog, Kangal Dog, Kangaroo Hound, Karelian Bear Dog, Karelo Finnish Laika, Karst Shepherd, Keeshond, Kennel Club of Great Britain, Kelpie, Kerry Beagle, Kerry Blue Terrier, King Charles Spaniel, Komondor, Kuvasz, Kyi Leo, KyiApso, Kyi Apso, Labrador Retriever, Lakeland Terrier, Landseer, Leash, leather leash, nylon leash, long line, lunge line, light line, electric collar, Leonburger, Lhasa Apso, litter, littermate, littermates, litterbox, Longhaired Whippet, Lowchen, lurcher, lure, lure coursing, Luizerner Laufhund, Magyar Agar, Mahratta Greyhound, Majestic Tree Hound, Maltese, Manchester Terrier, Maremma Sheepdog, Mastiff, Mastin, Mexican Hairless, Middle Asian Ovtcharka, Miniature Pinscher, Miniature Schnauzer, mongrel, mutt, Mountain Cur, Mudi, nail clipping, New Guinea Singing Dog, New Ireland Dog, New Zealand Dog, New Zealand Sheepdog, Newfoundland, non-sporting group, Norbottenspets, nordic dog, Norffolk Terrier, Norwegian Buhund, Norwegian Elkhound, Norwegian Lundehund, Norwich Terrier, Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever, nylabone, obedience trial, obedience competition, obedience title, Old Danish Bird Dog, Old English Sheepdog, Old English Mastiff, Olde English Bulldogge, Otterhoundd, Owczarek Podhalanski, Papillon, pariah, Patterdale Terrier, pedigree, Pekingese, Pembroke Welsh Corgi, Perro de Presa Mallorquin, Perro do Pastor Mallorquin, Perro de Presa Canario, Presa Canario, Peruvian Inca Orchid, pet shop, pet store, puppy mill, Petit Basset Griffon Vendeen, Betit Brabancon, Pharaoh Hound, pick of the litter, Pinscher, pit bull, pit bulldog, Plott Hound, Podengo Portugues, Pointer, pointing, Poitevin, police dog, Polish Hound, Polish Lowland Sheepdog, Pomeranian, Poodle, miniature Poodle, standard Poodle, Porcelaine, Portuguese Water Dog, Posavac Hound, Pudelpointer, Pug, Puli, Pumi, puppy, puppies, punishment, reinforcement, Rampur Dog, rare breed, Rastreador Brasileiro, Rat Terrier, rawhide, Redbone Coonhound, Redtick Coonhound, rescue dog, retriever field trial, Retriever, Rhodesian Ridgeback, Rottweiler, Rumanian Sheepdog, Russian Harlequin Hound, Russian Hound, Russian Spaniel, Russo European Laika, Saarlooswolfhond, Saint Bernard, Saluki, Samoyed, Sanshu Dog, Sarplaninac, Schapendoes, Schipperke, Scottish Deerhound, Scottish Terrier, Sealyham Terrier, seeing eye dog, assistance dog, Segugio Italiano, service dog, Shar Pei, sheepdog, Shetland Sheepdog, Sheltie, Shiba Inu, Shih Tzu, Shika Inu, Shiloh Shepherd, dog show, Siberian Husky, Sicilian Branchiero, Silky Terrier, Skye Terrier, Sloughi, Slovac Cuvac, Munsterlander, Smalandsstovare, Smooth Fox Terrier, socialization, socialized, unsocialized, SPCA, Soft Coated Wheaten Terrier, South Russian Ovtcharka, Spanish Mastiff, spay, spaying, neuter, neutering, Spinone Italiano, Stafforshire Bull Terrier, Stabyhoun, Standard Schnauzer, Schnauzer, Stephens Stock, Stichelhaar, Strellufstover, stud dog, bitch, dam, sire, Styrian Roughhaired Mountain Hound, Sumatra Battak, Sussex Spaniel, Swedish Grey Dog, Swedish Lapphund, Swedish Vallhund, Tahltan Bear Dog, Taigan, Talbot Hound, teacup poodle, teething, mouthing, nipping, Telomian, temperament, temperament testing, terrier, terrier group, Thai Ridgeback Dog, Tibetan Mastiff, Tibetan Spaniel, Tosa, Tosa Inu, Tosa Ken, toy dog, Toy Fox Terrier, Toy Group, Toy Manchester Terrier, tracking, trailing, Transylvanian Hound, Treeing Tennessee Brindle, Treeing Walker Coonhound, Trigg Hound, Tyroler Bracke, UD, UDT, UDTX, UKC, United Kennel Club, vicious, viciousness, euthanasia, veterinarian, Vizsla, Volpino Italiano, Water Dog of Spain, dogs of war, war dogs, water dog, water dogs, weight pulling, Weimaraner, Welsh Sheepdog, Welsh Springer Spaniel, Welsh Terrier, West Highland White Terrier, Westie, West Siberian Laika, Westminster Kennel Club, Westminster Dog Show, Westphalian Dachsbracke, Wetterhoun, Wheaten, Wheatie, Whippet, White German Shepherd, Wire Fox Terrier, Wirehaired Fox Terrier, Wirehaired Pointing Griffon, Wirehaired Pointer, wolf, wolf hybrid, wolf hybrids, working group, working dogs, Xoloitzcuintli, Yorkshire Terrier, Yorkie, Yugoslavian Mountain Hound, Yugoslavian Tricolor Hound, New Year's Day, January 1st, Birthday of Martin Luther King, third Monday in January. Inauguration Day, January 20th every four years, starting in 1937. Washington's Birthday, third Monday in February Inauguration Day, March 4th every four years. Armed Forces Day, third Saturday in May. Memorial Day, last Monday in May. Flag Day, June 14th. United States of America's Independence Day, July 4. Labor Day, first Monday in September. Columbus Day, second Monday in October. Election Day, Tuesday on or after November 2. Veterans Day, November 11th. Thanksgiving Day, fourth Thursday in November. Christmas Day, December 25th. Groundhog Day, February 2, Lincoln's Birthday, February 12, Valentine's Day, February 14, Washington's Birthday, February 22, St. Patrick's Day, March 17, April Fool's Day, April 1, Earth Day, April 22nd , Administrative Assistants' Day, Secretaries' Day, is the Wednesday of the last full week of April, Arbor Day the last Friday in April, Mothers' Day, second Sunday in May, Fathers' Day, third Sunday in June, Parents' Day, fourth Sunday in July, Grandparents' Day, Sunday after Labor Day, Columbus Day, October 12, United Nations Day, October 24, Halloween, October 31,

Afghanistan, Kabul, Albania, Tirane, Algeria, Algiers, Andorra, Andorra la Vella, Angola, Luanda, Antigua and Barbuda, Saint John's, Argentina, Buenos Aires, Armenia, Yerevan, Australia, Canberra, Austria, Vienna, Azerbaijan, Baku, The Bahamas, Nassau, Bahrain, Manama, Bangladesh, Dhaka, Barbados, Bridgetown, Belarus, Minsk, Belgium, Brussels, Belize, Belmopan, Benin, Porto-Novo, Bhutan, Thimphu, Bolivia, La Paz (administrative) Sucre (judicial), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Sarajevo, Botswana, Gaborone, Brazil, Brasilia, Brunei, Bandar Seri Begawan, Bulgaria, Sofia, Burkina Faso, Ouagadougou, Burundi, Bujumbura, Cambodia, Phnom Penh, Cameroon, Yaounde, Canada, Ottawa, Cape Verde, Praia, Central African Republic, Bangui, Chad, N'Djamena, Chile, Santiago, China, Beijing, Colombia, Bogota, Comoros, Moroni, Congo, Republic of the, Brazzaville, Congo, Democratic Republic of the, Kinshasa, Costa Rica, San Jose, Cote d'Ivoire, Yamoussoukro (official) Abidjan (de facto), Croatia, Zagreb, Cuba, Havana, Cyprus, Nicosia, Czech Republic, Prague, Denmark, Copenhagen, Djibouti, Djibouti, Dominica, Roseau, Dominican Republic, Santo Domingo, East Timor, Dili, Ecuador, Quito, Egypt, Cairo, El Salvador, San Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Malabo, Eritrea, Asmara, Estonia, Tallinn, Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, Fiji, Suva, Finland, Helsinki, France, Paris, Gabon, Libreville, The Gambia, Banjul, Georgia, Tbilisi, Germany, Berlin, Ghana, Accra, Greece, Athens, Grenada, Saint George's, Guatemala, Guatemala City, Guinea, Conakry, Guinea-Bissau, Bissau, Guyana, Georgetown, Haiti, Port-au-Prince, Honduras, Tegucigalpa, Hungary, Budapest, Iceland, Reykjavik, India, New Delhi, Indonesia, Jakarta, Iran, Tehran, Iraq, Baghdad, Ireland, Dublin, Israel, Jerusalem, Italy, Rome, Jamaica, Kingston, Japan, Tokyo, Jordan, Amman, Kazakhstan, Astana, Kenya, Nairobi, Kiribati, Tarawa, Korea, North, Pyongyang, Korea, South, Seoul, Kuwait, Kuwait City, Kyrgyzstan, Bishtek, Laos, Vientiane, Latvia, Riga, Lebanon, Beirut, Lesotho, Maseru, Liberia, Monrovia, Libya, Tripoli, Liechtenstein, Vaduz, Lithuania, Vilnius, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Skopje, Madagascar, Antananarivo, Malawi, Lilongwe, Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Maldives, Male, Mali, Bamako, Malta, Valletta, Marshall Islands, Majuro, Mauritania, Nouakchott, Mauritius, Port Louis, Mexico, Mexico City, Federated States of Micronesia, Palikir, Moldova, Chisinau, Monaco, Monaco, Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, Morocco, Rabat, Mozambique, Maputo, Myanmar (Burma), Rangoon but moving to Pyinmana, Namibia, Windhoek, Nauru, Yaren District, Nepal, Kathmandu, Netherlands, Amsterdam, New Zealand, Wellington, Nicaragua, Managua, Niger, Niamey, Nigeria, Abuja, Norway, Oslo, Oman, Muscat, Pakistan, Islamabad, Palau, Koror, Panama, Panama City, Papua New Guinea, Port Moresby, Paraguay, Asuncion, Peru, Lima, Philippines, Manila, Poland, Warsaw, Portugal, Lisbon, Qatar, Doha, Romania, Bucharest, Russia, Moscow, Rwanda, Kigali, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Basseterre, Saint Lucia, Castries, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Kingstown, Samoa, Apia, San Marino, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Sao Tome, Saudi Arabia, Riyadh, Senegal, Dakar, Serbia and Montenegro, Belgrade, Seychelles, Victoria, Sierra Leone, Freetown, Singapore, Singapore, Slovakia, Bratislava, Slovenia, Ljubljana, Solomon Islands, Honiara, Somalia, Mogadishu, South Africa, Pretoria (administrative) Cape Town (legislative) Bloemfontein (judiciary), Spain, Madrid, Sri Lanka, Colombo, Sudan, Khartoum, Suriname, Paramaribo, Swaziland, Mbabana, Sweden, Stockholm, Switzerland, Bern, Syria, Damascus, Taiwan, Taipei, Tajikistan, Dushanbe, Tanzania, Dar es Salaam, Thailand, Bangkok, Togo, Lome, Tonga, Nuku'alofa, Trinidad and Tobago, Port-of-Spain, Tunisia, Tunis, Turkey, Ankara, Turkmenistan, Ashgabat, Tuvalu, Funafuti, Uganda, Kampala, Ukraine, Kiev, United Arab Emirates, Abu Dhabi, United Kingdom, London, United States, Washington D.C., Uruguay, Montevideo, Uzbekistan, Tashkent, Vanuatu, Port-Vila, Vatican City (Holy See), Vatican City, Venezuela, Caracas, Vietnam, Hanoi, Yemen, Sanaa, Zambia, Lusaka, Zimbabwe, Harare

Insect Rights?

So, you think I’m kidding about animal rights extremists?

In Europe, they proposed legislation to give the same rights people have to “insects, spiders, scorpions, and centipedes.”

Do you want THEM in power?

Animal rights nutcases have huge political power in Europe… and they are coming here to inflict their pain on you.

Know What You Support

Do you know the difference between ANIMAL RIGHTS and ANIMAL WELFARE?

I am for animal welfare, not animal rights. If you love your dog, you will be, too.

Dog "Guardian" vs. Dog "Owner"

Have you wondered why the animal rights folks want to designate you as your dog’s GUARDIAN instead of OWNER?

Check this out. It’s sneaky, and it is part of an agenda to ban your right to reasonably own a dog.

Rome Bans Fishbowls

Here’s a great example of what can happen if you let the animal rights nutcases any significant political power… banning goldfish bowls and making dog walks mandatory.

These laws are enacted to gum up your rights to own a pet, not for any legitimate animal welfare purposes.

I’ve had plenty of elderly customers who weren’t fit enough to take their dogs for a walk every day. They had pooches that didn’t need that kind of thing in order to be healthy or well adjusted. The dogs were fit and happy, and got other forms of exercise every day playing with toys and running around in the back yard.

Either we organize and start fighting back, or this garbage will end up on our shores.

Many liberal thinkers in the US believe we should mimic what they do in Europe. This kind of animal rights nonsense will affect us in a serious way if we don’t stomp on it now. Laws like PAWS are just the sort of thing that we should be opposing.

There are reasons why the settlers left Europe 500 years ago, fought against their imperial oppressors, wrote the Constitution, and formed the United States of America. There is also a reason why Europe is in decline, and why the smart, ambitious young professionals are coming here. Euro-socialism is a failure.

Want To Reduce Crime In Your Community?

Then designate some of your more dangerous parks as an “off leash” area for dogs.

This has been used in various communities, including in Seattle.

It works. It is like implementing a Block Watch program. Criminals don’t want their hangouts patrolled by citizens, especially citizens with dogs. The citizens start demanding that the parks departments clean up the discarded needles and condoms, move out the bums (no, I’m not politically correct… I won’t call them “homeless”… they are bums), increase police patrols (which the cities don’t do because there are folks that benefit politically by ignoring certain types of crimes… because they are corrupt), and invest in new amenities. The dog owners also start pitching in to clean up these parks and making them safe again. The community benefits all the way around.

Animal control doesn’t like it, because bureaucracies don’t like losing power. Neither do the parks department bureaucrats. Take a look at what is happening in Chicago. People are demanding more off leash areas, and the city officials are fighting it.

There isn’t enough off leash space for dogs in most metropolitan and suburban cities. Allowing dogs off leash in dangerous areas, and after dark in all parks, say from 10 pm to 5 am, would benefit most communities.

Sunday, October 30, 2005

Remember Buddy... Where Was His Master?

Remember when Bill Clinton got a dog (Buddy, a fun loving, chocolate Labrador Retriever) to boost his sagging ratings in the polls?

Then, that fad faded, as such whims do, the dog was sent off somewhere, ran into the street and died… with Bill Clinton a million miles away.

Nope. Never forgave Clinton for that.

The Bushes have been dog people for years. Don’t see stories like that about their dogs…

Don’t get a dog if you can’t keep it with you.

Lots of celebrities do keep dogs with them, such as Oprah… so don’t start making excuses for Clinton. He is, and always will be, a publicity seeking ego hound. I have no respect for him as a person. This isn’t a Liberal/ Conservative thing, either. Oprah can’t be accused of being a conservative. But, clearly, she cares for her dogs.

Buddy was loyal. Bill wasn’t. And I don’t let Hillary Clinton off the hook, either. It was their home and their dog. I hope she doesn’t run for Prez… we don’t need another Buddy adoption when the chips are down.

Liability & Dog Breed Bans

When fighting a political battle, you have to be able to recognize allies and count votes.

I contend that the center/ right of both political parties, Democrat and Republican, are our best allies, and best chance of passing pro-dog legislation.

Here are a couple of examples:

1.) Who passed legislation to shield gun manufacturers from liability, when someone misuses a gun? The Republicans in this Congress. The Democrats have, for several years, been wanting to make it the gun manufacturer’s responsibility if a criminal uses a gun to kill someone. Why should a gun manufacturer be responsible if some weirdo steals a gun and then uses it to murder someone? It is immoral to hold people responsible for sins that they never committed.

2.) Who passed legislation to shield fast food retailers from liability, when someone stuffs their faces for years and years and ends up morbidly obese? Again, the Republicans in this Congress.

The Republicans, as a general rule, if they are conservatively bent, tend to support the idea of personal responsibility. The liberal ones will not.

The Democrats, as a general rule, if they are liberal, tend to protect whomever they perceive to be the “victim”, regardless of whether the victim caused their own problems or not. The conservative ones will not.

Which brings us to banning of certain breeds of dog.

As a rule of thumb, if you are going to be able to fight against breed bans, you’ll get a better hearing from less liberal Republicans and Democrats, because they will tend to focus on whether the dog or owner were responsible for a bad dog bite incident. Similarly, the more liberal the politician, the more they will want to hold the breed responsible, and want to ban the breed for the good of society.

Think on that when you go to the ballot box… or when you are lobbying for change… or writing letters to the editor…

Who are our allies and who will vote with us?

a.) Center/ right politicians, whether Democrat or Republican. Liberal Democrats and Republicans will side against us… and that could mean the end of your dog, period.

b.) I’m betting we can get some support from the gun and food industry, since this kind of trend to blame things instead of individuals has a trickle down effect to them, too. I think you can get the gun lobby, and possibly other targeted groups, such as the fast food manufacturers, to side with us in our fight… and even mobilize their people to send logistical support, funds, and volunteers our way to support our pro-dog causes.

Saturday, October 29, 2005

Can't Be Pro Dog & A Pacifist

I’m not a pacifist, and neither is a dog.

I’m also a logical person. I think you need to be consistent in your beliefs and political philosophies.

If you get in a conversation with a pacifist, they are typically also a believer in either a.) evolution or b.) God.

Well, you can’t honestly believe and reconcile that the world works according to the laws of the survival of the fittest, and also be a pacifist. Have any of you read Darwin? You can’t repeal the law of the jungle just because you don’t like it. Likewise, you can’t honestly believe and reconcile that the world works according to the laws of God, and also be a pacifist. You can’t explain how Jesus drove the money changers out of the temple with a whip, or accept the rest of the Bible, say you believe in the teachings of Jesus and the prophets, and be a pacifist. Can’t do it.

When you talk to an animal rights nut, pacifist or a far left wing nutcase about the use of dogs for self protection, they are against it. These are also the types that will fight you when it comes to allowing dogs to protect themselves or you. They are also against using dogs to hunt. And they fight against normal dog training techniques, opting for harnesses, head collars, treats and clicker training… while excusing why their dogs don’t obey in emergencies, even if they endanger others in the process. Dogs are predatory and pack oriented, much the same way people are. Aggression can't be programmed out of them... or wished away... or legislated away.

Extremism comes in many forms.

The Right To Keep And Deploy A Dog?

My understanding is that the courts have generally ruled that a police dog is not a “weapon”, because its primary function has been to locate criminals, not attack them, which is true. So, the terminology has tended to refer to dogs as a “tool” of the police, with the biting part incidental to the location, capture, and arrest of suspects.

But, just as many legal theories are fictions made up by lawyers and the courts to get an end result that they want, without then directly delving into other sticky issues, we could first argue that our pets are just, well, pets. But, clearly, in reality, the police want the dogs along to protect them in a fight. The same is true with the military. Yes, they use the dogs to locate suspects, but what about times when they come on the scene and the suspect is readily visible and threatening? Then, the dog isn’t just a “tool”.

This, therefore, comes to where I want this debate to be taken.

Don’t citizens, just like the police, get dogs to protect them? C’mon! Let’s be honest here. Just as dogs are “tools” to the police, and the biting incidental, aren’t dogs “pets” to the Average Joe, and the biting incidental?

Then, there are guns. Guns are weapons, period. The police are allowed to use them, and so are citizens. The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Yes, I know, fanatics will tell you that we don’t have the right to have a gun, but we all know that isn’t true. So, aren’t stun guns, batons, and mace considered “weapons’ by the court? Yes, they are. But they are considered as less-than-lethal weapons. Same with a police dog. The courts have acknowledged that dogs give the police another non-lethal way of dealing with criminals, and are not considered, generally, as “excessive force”. Then, why aren’t PET DOGS considered non-lethal weapons by the courts… and PROTECTED BY THE SECOND AMENDMENT of the US Constitution?

Maybe this kind of logic should be pressed in order to fight back against the banning of dogs. Maybe there is sufficient precedent to let a dog owner argue in court that if you get a dog as a pet and for self protection, that the lawmakers and courts can’t ban you from reasonably owning them?

Hey, you lawyers out there: Am I on the right track on this?

The Use Of Force To Defend Yourself

There have been numerous court cases defining the proper use of a dog for police work.

I think anyone who is working on a proposed dog bite law should examine these precedents.

There are times when it is appropriate for your dog to bite someone. The courts have recognized the value in using a dog against criminals.

Here is a web page with some interesting case analyses.

Some interesting concepts worth evaluating:

a.) Use of force continuum
b.) Use of a dog is not considered deadly force
c.) Definition of negligent training

None of this is indication that the courts are hostile to dogs being used to defend against criminals. In fact, it is an endorsement of the role of dogs in crime fighting, and helps show us the way to define the appropriate deployment of our own personal dogs in an emergency situation when facing a criminal.

Because, when the police aren’t there to protect you from a crime (and when are they ever on the spot at the time an attack takes place on anyone…?) it might just come down to you and your dog.

I think the logical conclusion would be you could use a dog for self protection when faced with:

a.) the immediate threat of trespass, terrorist crime, bodily harm or death would cause the dog handler to feel the need to actively and physically defend themselves;
b.) the suspect is engaged in a crime;
c.) a warning is given to the criminal before the dog is sent to bite.

I think a homeowner’s, or citizen’s, dog should be held to a lower standard of training than a police officer’s dog. A police officer has more tools at hand to deal with, and fight against, a criminal than a citizen. Thus, the situation is more dangerous to the citizen than the police officer. As a result, the claim of “excessive force” should be exempted when the above criteria are met before a dog is actively sent on a criminal by a citizen.

My Rules

I guess there are some things I should spell out with regards to this blog…

By participating in this web log, you agree to the following:

a.) I’m against any kind of wacko political stunts to further the pro-dog agenda… meaning no violence, property destruction, foul language, or anything that would otherwise bring dishonor to ourselves, our dogs, reasonable dog owners, or reasonable public servants. We’ve all been disgusted and appalled by the stunts of the animal rights nuts. We don’t want to be like them. You will not engage in any of these kinds of stunts in my name, or in reference to this web log.
b.) We need to work within the political / legal / cultural system. We need to persuade people by the logic of our positions. We have a strong case to present, and it is a winning cause. You agree to abide by the law.
c.) Everything stated here is my opinion. Every event quoted is “alleged” until proven in a court of law. I’m trying to examine and illustrate why we are right on this issue, not to conduct an inquisition or legal proceeding.
d.) From time to time, I receive very interesting comments, emails and letters. Typically they refer to some kind of behavioral problem or political issue. Since this web site is a way for me to oftentimes educate about responsible dog ownership, I shall sometimes use these inquiries and correspondence as the basis of a posting, article or as an example. By submitting any correspondence or inquiry, you thereby agree that the materials and information submitted are wholly your own, and you hereby give me permission to publish them in whole or in part, for potential profit or for free, without compensation to you of any kind, and to indemnify and hold me, and anyone or any organization referenced here, harmless for all claims and damages arising out of anything you say. This information, if we choose it for source material for this web site or other publication, will usually, but not always, be reasonably stripped of direct information about who you are, to protect your identity. This information shall then be used to educate people and benefit society concerning pro dog politics, dog training, behavior, responsible dog ownership and other relevant issues.
e.) If I don’t like the way you treat others, you can be banned from this web, at my sole option and discretion.
f.) Copyright and Trademarks and Patents: Nothing contained herein shall be used, promulgated, modified, transmitted or displayed without Sam Basso’s prior express written consent.
g.) Governing Law, Venue and Jurisdiction: All claims relating to this web site or Sam Basso shall be governed by the laws of the State of Arizona without regard to its conflict of law provisions. Any action with respect to such claims in shall be determined solely by Sam Basso, and brought in the Superior Court for Maricopa County, Arizona and may not be removed therefrom, except by express written permission by Sam Basso, at his sole option and discretion.
h.) If a court of competent jurisdiction holds any provision of this agreement and statement of policies is deemed to be unenforceable or contrary to law or void as against public policy or otherwise, if possible such provision shall be modified to be as similar to the original provision while still conforming to law (otherwise it shall be considered severable), with the remaining provisions continuing in full force and effect. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties and no modification hereof shall be effective unless agreed to in writing and signed by all parties. Exchanged emails shall not constitute such written agreement.
h.) Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2005 Sam Basso, Phoenix, AZ, U.S.A. All rights reserved.
i.) Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved.
j.) No Warranties and Limits of Liabilities, Uses of Information: Information provided herein is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either express or implied, including without limitation warranties of merchantability, accuracy, timeliness, fitness for a particular purpose, or completeness. The author(s) of this information and web site assumes no liability or responsibility for any errors or omissions contained herein. Users of this information do so at their own risk. You can’t train every dog the same way, political issues are often times more complicated than presented in a web log, and legal remedies and advice need review by a competent attorney. Since this information is for educational, and sometimes business, purposes, some information is purposely omitted because the intention is to stimulate debate. This blog is NOT a political action committee or similar organization, nor represents itself as a non-profit venture. This is an e-newspaper and editorial comment device, for all practical purposes. Sam Basso and other producers of information for this web site shall not be made liable to users of this information, or anyone else, for any direct or indirect damages arising from any use of this web or information. Users must hire Sam Basso to obtain more complete, accurate and current information. We make no warranty that any of the materials on this web site are accurate, complete, or current. Although we may make changes to the materials contained herein at any time without notice, we do not make any commitment to update the materials.
k.) Permission is granted to temporarily download the materials (information, graphics, or software) from this web site for personal, non-commercial transitory, or educational viewing only. Such use may not violate the policies of or or their related entities. You may also excerpt this web, or link to it, for the purpose of promoting pro-dog causes. We also reserve the right to require that you withdraw and/or delete any quote or link that we find detrimental to the purposes of this web log. This is the grant of a license, not a transfer of title, and under this license you may not: remove any copyright or other proprietary notations from the materials or transfer the materials to another person or "mirror" the materials on any other server. This license shall automatically terminate if you violate any of these restrictions and may be terminated by us at any time.
l.) Hyperlinks to third-party web sites: We shall, from time to time, hyperlink this web to other web sites. We cannot be responsible for the contents or policies of any site we link to, nor do we make any express or implied warranty as to whether you shall be satisfied or damaged by interacting with these other web sites or their related businesses. It is possible that some links will be to retailers and manufacturers, Sam Basso might be an authorized affiliate, manufacturers representative, or otherwise be receiving a referral fee, commission and/or profit on any purchases you make. Sam Basso cannot make guarantees concerning the business policies or practices of these retailers or manufacturers. If you have a purchase dispute, you should contact them directly.
m.) Information Provided To Us: You agree that any information you provide to us shall be complete, current and accurate as to all relevant details. Any replies we make to you shall be limited to the quality and quantity of information you provide to us.
n.) Prices: All terms, prices, policies and conditions are subject to change without notice. All sales are final; no refunds; sold "as is."

I hate rules. I wish we lived in a world where "a man's word was his bond", where people took personal responsibility for their words and actions, where you could do business on a handshake, and that people worked out their differences in a friendly and reasonable way. But, unfortunately, things just aren't that way. I have to penalize the 95% of good people out there, by having to implement some business rules, so that I can weed out doing business with the 5% of the nut cases out there. I apologize for having to set some rules just to advocate pro-dog editorials and to make an honest buck.
-- Sam

Friday, October 28, 2005

NO WAY on Santorum 2008!

I generally vote center/ right Republican. I’m for free enterprise, strong national defense, the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence, and religious freedom. I’ve got liberal and conservative friends. But, I’m a true, classic conservative at heart… a balanced mix libertarian (small “L”) in economic matters, socially conservative family values, and traditionally strong national defense/ law and order/ Constitutionalist conservative legal views.

But, there is NO WAY I’m going to vote for Sen. Santorum (R ) if he runs for President. What kind of Republican sides with animal rights nutcases? To me, this is a classic RINO (Republican In Name Only). No wonder we aren’t seeing a Reagan type revolution in Congress with these types in leadership positions in Congress.

Something about that doesn’t fit. Something stinks when a Senator sides with any group of fanatics, such as with the PAWS legislation (see previous post).

What Is Santorum Thinking? This Is A Republican?

Senator Rick Santorum Muzzles Opponents of his S1139 (PAWS) Bill

Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance

For Immediate Release

October 25, 2005

Senator Rick Santorum Muzzles Opponents of his S1139 (PAWS) Bill

Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) has scheduled a November 8, 2005 hearing before the Senate Agriculture Research, Nutrition and General Legislation Subcommittee, which he chairs, to take testimony on his own S1139 "Animal Welfare Act of 2005" (PAWS) bill. No opponent or critic of this devastating anti-hobby breeder legislation will be permitted to testify. Only six speakers are scheduled to appear at the Washington, DC hearing, all of them well-established PAWS supporters. Formal speaking requests by others have been ignored, effectively silencing and excluding from the legislative process the tens of thousands of pet owners and organizations opposed to this legislation.

PAWS has virtually nothing to do with animal welfare or closing Animal Welfare Act "loopholes." It's a direct attack on U.S. hobby breeders, hunting dog owners and animal rescuers. PAWS federalizes hobby pet breeding. Rick Santorum and the animal rights lobby failed to enact such a law in 2002 and they're back, trying again. Other PAWS supporters testifying have a financial interest in seeing S1139, or its House equivalent HR2669, passed.

A substantial majority of U.S. pet owners opposes PAWS, including over 30 American Kennel Club parent breed clubs and 300 - 400 other organizations nationwide. Their voices won't be heard on November 8, 2005.

Announced S1139 (PAWS) November 8, 2005 Hearing Witnesses

Panel 1
Witness 1: Ron Menaker, Chairman - American Kennel Club
Witness 2: Dr. Henry E. Childers, President - American Veterinary
Medical Association
Witness 3: John E. Hoffman, Esq. - Dog Fancier

Panel 2:
Witness 1: Wayne Pacelle, President & CEO - Humane Society of the United
Witness 2: Sara Amundson, Legislative Director - Doris Day Animal League
Witness 3: Norma Worley, Director - Animal Welfare Program, Maine
Department of Agriculture

Kelly Wichman, President of the Dog Federation of Wisconsin, commented, "Why even go through the time and expense of a holding a hearing? There's not a single witness testifying that believes hobby breeders should not be subject to Federal oversight - Uncle Sam in our bedrooms sounds good to them."

California Federation of Dog Clubs President Susan Sholar stated, "I am very upset that this Californian John Hoffman is representing individual dog owners. I have been president here for 5 years and I have never heard of this man. He has never contacted me regarding any dog fancy issues AND his own parent club is opposing PAWS."

Master of Foxhounds Association Executive Director Lt. Col. Dennis J. Foster declared, "We don't need the federal government, overworked and under funded, overseeing people's rights to breed and make decisions for their dogs when state and local laws more than cover the issues. We especially don't need animal rights organizations like HSUS and PETA, who have been involved in writing this legislation telling us what's good for our pets. Whatever happened to a fair hearing with both sides equally represented? This hearing is a farce and an insult to democracy."

Susan Wolf of the North Carolina Responsible Animal Owners Alliance opined "By falsely labeling PAWS the puppy mill bill, its supporters are using emotional jingoism to push a bill that can't be factually justified. Barring hearing testimony from PAWS opponents reinforces the conclusion that this flawed bill can't stand up under careful scrutiny." "I'm particularly concerned that PAWS will force the USDA to regulate most US hunting dog owners," said Bob Kane, spokesman for the nationwide Sportsmen and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance. "This bill is aimed directly at private hobby breeders and hunters, two of the animal rightists' major longtime targets. Senator Santorum needs to reschedule this hearing and make sure that all affected stakeholders are properly represented," Kane continued.

See <> for additional PAWS
information or contact Bob Kane at 540-543-2312


The Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance (SAOVA) is a nationwide, nonpartisan group of volunteers lobbying legislation and seeking to elect politicians who will oppose the animal rightist threat to our rights as Americans. Our members hunt, fish and own livestock, dogs, cats and other pets. For more information about SAOVA, call (540)
543-2312 or visit <>

Dogs and Guns, Again...

There are meaningful parallels between the banning of gun ownership and the banning of dog breeds.


“With Canada's murder rate rising 12% last year and this year's high-profile rash of gang murders (six shootings just this week in Toronto), politicians are looking for someone to blame... On Monday night, during his dinner with Condoleezza Rice, Prime Minister Paul Martin claimed Canada's gun crime problem was being caused by weapons smuggled in from the United States.”

Mr. Martin's larger mistake is that -- like most politicians in Canada -- he puts his faith in gun control as a means to fight crime, and clearly believes the United States should too. But as Canada's experience with its registry -- which hasn't solved any crimes -- shows, gun control isn't the answer. Getting law-abiding citizens to disarm or register their weapons is easy. The hard part is taking guns away from criminals. Toronto's gangs have no trouble getting the illegal drugs they sell. Since they are already involved in a criminal trade, why should we expect that the law would keep them from acquiring guns to defend their turf?”


Let’s substitute the word “dog” for “gun/ weapon”, “bites” for “murder”, etc., and see how that looks… Oh, let’s also substitute “Denver” for “Canada”, since they have banned ownership of pit bulldogs…

With Colorado’s recent sensational dog bite incidents last year and this year's high-profile rash of dog bites (several incidents last month in Jefferson County), politicians are looking for someone to blame... On Monday night, Denver’s mayor claimed Colorado's dog bite problem was being caused by pit bull dogs.”

The Mayor's larger mistake is that -- like most politicians -- he puts his faith in killing pit bull dogs as a means to fight crime, and clearly believes the everyone else should too. But as Colorado's experience with its new pit bull dog ban -- which hasn't solved any crimes -- shows, banning dogs isn't the answer. Getting law-abiding citizens to kill their pit bull dogs or register their dogs is easy. The hard part is stopping criminals from using dogs in their crimes. Denver's gangs have no trouble getting the dogs they use for their drug operations. Since they are already involved in a criminal trade, why should we expect that the law would keep them from acquiring other breeds of dog to defend their turf?


Close parallel, isn’t it?

Innocent, law abiding people obeyed the law, licensed their pit bull dogs in Colorado. Then, the government blamed the dogs for the actions of criminals, and then took advantage of the intentions of those law abiding citizens. They used the registry of licensed dogs, went to people’s homes, seized their dogs, and put them all to death.

Do you really think this will stop the criminals from obtaining dogs and wrecking them? Do you think that banning pit bull dogs, or any other breed, will prevent criminals from getting dogs to guard their drug operations? Don’t you think criminals could breed a new type of pit bull by breeding terriers with bulldog breeds? Or, just switch to other breeds?

Study The NRA

The NRA has successfully fought back against gun bans.

There was another successful defeat of gun banning in Brazil last week.

The clues to fighting back have already been given us by the pro-gun groups.

Dogs Help Fight Crime

Just like the anti-gun folks will never let facts get in the way of their fanaticism, the anti-dog folks wont let facts get in the way of their fanatical desire to kill off reasonable dog ownership. The facts are that gun ownership reduces the crime rate. The facts are that dog ownership reduces the crime rate, too.

How many of you got a dog as a crime deterrent?

How many women have you met that got a dog so they could safely go jogging alone, take walks alone, or so they would be safer living alone or in a first floor apartment?

Do you want that taken away from you? If you ban dog ownership, will that make any of us really safer?

Dogs aren’t the problem, criminals are the problem.

Don't Blame The Dog

Next time you see someone getting arrested for their dog biting someone, realize that even the police have these same types of problems…

Note the following:

a.) The dog was off leash, on a search for a criminal, so was in a defensive state.
b.) The dog didn’t bite the handler.
c.) The dog had bitten the other police officer during the search. This kind of incident has happened before. When you deploy a dog, you have the other officers BEHIND the dog, not in front of it.
d.) The female police officer kept struggling with the dog, so it wouldn’t release the bite… a police dog, or any dog, in a fight, isn’t going to willingly let go if you keep fighting the dog.
e.) The dog had troubles letting go in a previous apprehension. This is a training and deployment problem. It is a shame the dog had to die.

Mistakes happen. Bad training and deployment happens. This wasn’t the dog’s fault.

Top trainers know how to solve situations like this. Maybe this police department needs to bring in a training expert to review their program.

Dog Bites

Dog bite situations are more complicated than we are led to believe by the dog haters and the media.

Here are a couple of videos of dog bites…

Don’t Handle Dogs You Don’t Know

This one is the result of getting in a dog’s face, when you don’t know the dog. People do dumb stuff like this all the time. I had a lady run up to my dog a few years ago, grabbed him by the muzzle and kissed him on the lips! She came up from behind me and was on him before I could do anything. Fortunately, nothing happened. She loved dogs, and my dog reminded her of a dog she used to have… still her face could have been ripped off.

Watch this video, look at the dog’s body language (any dog person could have seen this coming if they had been watching what was going on), watch the handler (who isn’t seeing the events… which is why you have to be doubly diligent in your supervision when around crowds), and watch the idiot who closes in on this dog. This was a PROVOKED attack, in my opinion. I don’t blame the dog. This was a police service dog… why would such a dog be expected to tolerate a stranger coming in that close and over the top of him?

Police Dogs Training For Terrorists and Criminals

Here is an excellent video of the training and deployment of police/ military service dogs. I am a big service dog supporter, and advocate the use of police and military dogs to fight criminals and terrorists. These dogs are amazing. Watch the intensity and courage of these dogs.

If you ban the breeding and training of aggressive dogs, then where will the police get the dogs to protect us? Police dogs are bred by private breeders. By banning the breeding of protection dogs, you then can’t apprehend criminals and terrorists like this. The idea here is to get the outlaws, not outlaw the dogs!

If your kid was being held hostage, or your husband had to fight these criminals, would you want to deprive the police from using service dogs? Not me!

Many dog bites are justified. Got it now?

Thursday, October 27, 2005

Animal Rights Terrorism?

The Power Of The Dog Blog

If we are to win on our dog related positions, we need to master the use of the internet as an organizing force. I have just finished reading “Blog” by Hugh Hewitt. It is a must read. The dog haters and animal rights nuts have a head start against us in the media, so we have to now play catch up. Our advantage is that our positions will resonate with a majority of voters, and we can defeat the other side’s radical proposals. People love dogs and will reject being over regulated. We also need to start influencing the debate over reasonable dog ownership laws, rules and practices. That is why it is important for you to link your pro-dog web page to this blog. And if you let me know about your pro-dog articles, web pages, and blogs, I'll link this page to yours.

Harriet Miers Withdrawal Affects Us, Too!

The withdrawal of Harriet Miers nomination as a Supreme Court justice has me thinking…

Dog lovers have a stake in who gets on the Supreme Court. For now, we are an unorganized group of voters. But, decisions handed down by the Supreme Court affect our rights to reasonably own a dog.

For the past few years, dog owners and dog haters have started fighting it out in the courts. Many lawsuits over dogs are working their way through the court system. It is only a matter of time before issues such as breed bans, dog bite laws, homeowner association restrictions on dog ownership, breeding, and dog ownership make it to the Supreme Court.

We need to start watching and participating in this debate, too.


If you participate in Halloween, it is foolish to let your dog greet kids or adults in costumes, especially at night. Your dog won’t see those costumes, or their behavior, as being anything but threatening. LEAVE YOUR DOG HOME, or put your dog away when Trick Or Treaters come by your house. Your dog could see them as a threat and attack.

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

Dog Was Better Than A Smoke Detector

The dog alerted the owner to the smoke before the smoke alarms went off."

There is a good reason why dogs belong with people...
Maybe Your Homeowner's Association Should Reconsider Its Ban On Dog Ownership...

" A family dog and locked door apparently thwarted would-be burglars at an Ann Arbor home Tuesday evening, city police reported."

We all know that dogs make our homes safer. I know of a family member that won't sleep with their window open at night... because they live in a first floor apartment. They tell me if they had a dog, it would be different...

Cities Are Getting A Clue: Make Parks For Dogs

Dogs need open space and play areas. Cities started with creating off leash areas in the worst parts of town. Now, they are catching on that people want a place, nearby, that is suitable for taking dogs for training, off leash play, and recreation. So, the next wave will be parks, nice parks, dedicated for dog owners. This will go a long way towards reduction of dog biting incidents (more socialization = fewer biting incidents), better training (peer pressure in public = people wanting their dogs to be well behaved in public), more city satisfaction (dog lovers will move to areas that are pet friendly).

Check this one out! This is going to be a growing trend. Please crosspost to other dog friendly sites. Get this to your local city council members!
Yes, we vote... Pro Dog!

Are dog owners a political constituency? To answer that question, My Dog Votes™ announced today the launch of The My Dog Votes™ 2005 Voter Opinion Survey. The My Dog Votes™ 2005 Voter Opinion Survey will seek to benchmark the political impact of anti-dog laws and policy through a random sampling of 1000 dog owners who are also registered voters. Dog owners are faced with rising local and state anti-dog legislation and measures.

Tuesday, October 25, 2005

When Should It Be OK For A Dog To Bite?

If you want animal control to focus on removing truly vicious dogs from the streets, and to prosecute negligent dog owners, then your local dog bite law should specifically spell out when a dog SHOULD BE allowed to bite. If the biting incidents don't fall within these exceptions, then those cases are the ones that you want animal control investigating and setting up for prosecution. These kinds of clear lines, between what is permissible and what isn't , helps law enforcement, the public, dog owners, and dog trainers focus on improving public safety. Too many times, dogs and dog owners have been dragged into the legal process that didn't deserve to be there. Many times, innocent dogs have been unjustly put to death, or owners have pled guilty to crimes they didn't commit, because the owners couldn't afford the legal costs to save their dogs or themselves.

Here are examples of situations where dogs SHOULD be allowed to bite:

1.) Legitimate self defense: includes biting as a result of teasing, threatening, entering territory, abuse, taking toys or food from dogs you don't own or know, defending people from criminals, and other examples of self defense.

2.) Defense of territory (including home, car and my things): people should expect to be bitten when they intrude into the territory of a dog without the owner's express consent

3.) Defense of pack (including family and family pets): if you threaten a dog's family, or other pets in the family, a dog will protect them. This is reasonable and natural behavior for dogs. It is normal for almost all mammal species to defend their young. I dare you to approach a female bear and her cubs... you had better be prepared to shoot and kill her, because she will be coming to kill you. It is normal for a female dog to be very aggressive, and even attack, if a stranger approaches her puppies. If you get bitten by handling the puppies, then it is YOUR fault, not the fault of the dog protecting them. We do this with our kids: we protect them from harm, even with our own lives, and no one considers this to be abnormal. We need to wake up and realize that dogs protect their pack members, and this should be considered normal and permissible under the law. People have to start taking personal responsibility for their interactions with animals, and quit blaming the animals for the ignorance of the people that were bitten.

4.) Establishment of a reasonable pack order within the home and at off leash dog parks: dogs will scrap with one another to set up a pack in the home or in social gatherings; if you go to an off leash park, then dogs will sometimes get in fights to establish rank order... and that is the risk you take by going there... don't blame the dogs!

5.) Puppy mouthing (which is not the same as being aggressive)

6.) While being trained, and in the midst of long term maintenance training, to teach a dog to contain it's drives and aggression. Some dogs NEED to be trained to bite in order for them to be conditioned to contain their aggression. This might seem strange to those that aren't familiar with aggression, but for example, police quality dogs are SAFER if they have been properly trained when TO bite and when NOT TO bite. They need both. Obedience training alone can't teach these dogs to be non-aggressive. They are born aggressive, it is genetic. Proper training can only teach these dogs to be controllable. The aggressive drives must be Capped, meaning the dog is conditioned to contain the drive to bite and learns also when it can bite and when it must not bite. Some pet dogs NEED to be bite trained in order for them to learn how to contain the aggression inside them. THIS TYPE OF TRAINING IS NORMAL dog training for professional dog trainers when dealing with aggressive breeds. Many dogs need ongoing bite training throughout their lives in order to be reliable and controllable. For example, police dogs are continually trained. If not, then they might one day bite a criminal, and keep on attacking and not come off the suspect, which then would make the police liable for using excessive force. Aggressive dogs, like police dogs, need to learn how to contain their aggression, and then need ongoing training to keep them malleable and controllable. Most of our dog breeds have some form of aggression in them, since they needed different forms of aggression to do their work: terriers are often aggressive towards other dogs and animals - they were and are fighters, the man working dogs imprint humans as being of their same species so they show the same kind of aggression that they show towards other dogs, the sight hounds were bred to be killers of game and sometimes other canines, the mastiffs were bred to take down large game and guard property, the flock guards were bred to be aggressive towards canines, the hounds were bred to be aggressive towards furred animals, some of the pointers were bred to be able to guard the hunter's game, etc., etc. If you read the work of Konrad Lorenz, or even Charles Darwin, you will clearly see that aggression is a NECESSARY PART of being a pack oriented animal, and it CANNOT be bred out of the domestic dog or they would no longer be dogs. So, we have to train and channel aggression instead.

7.) For legitimate police, sport protection (like Schutzhund, French Ring Sport, IPO, KNPV, etc.), and personal security work. This kind of work preserves and promotes the general welfare of the working dogs and helps protect the public at large. I also believe that protection dogs, including pets, should be held to the same legal standards as are police dogs. There is plenty of case law defining how a police dog should be deployed. If we would make laws for every day citizens that mirrored the training and deployment standards of police dogs, then it would be much clearer for everyone when it is legal to use a dog for protection and when it is inappropriate, plus definitions of competent training and handling standards. It should be legal for people to own a dog for personal protection. We have a right to self defense, and a dog can be a great deterrent to crime.

8.) Legitimate hunting purposes

9.) Accidents. Sometimes a dog is chasing a tennis ball. You pick it up to toss it, and the dog tries to grab for it before you release it and the dog bites your hand. This isn't a dangerous dog. The owner, or the person playing with the dog is being stupid, and they mishandle the dog and are bitten.

10.) Illness or injury. Some normal dogs will bite when they have been severely injured or when they are suffering from an illness. I have seen otherwise normal dogs bite people because of undiagnosed cancer, while fighting off a bad infection, etc. Once the dog is cured, the biting goes away. These dogs shouldn't be categorized as being "dangerous" once they are well. On the other hand, we should expect our dogs to be safe when stressed and moderately in pain.

Other than in these circumstances, when a dog bites, then the owner and dog should be judged by the severity of the situation and punished accordingly. All vicious dogs should be put down. Vicious dogs are typically 1.) fear biters - which isn't the same as an aggressive biter, 2.) dogs that will attack children (I am a firm believer that all dogs should be good with children, especially with kids that they know and live with) without provocation, and/ or 3.) unpredictably aggressive dogs. All negligent owners, meaning people that know that their dogs have problems, yet continue to endanger others (animals or people) should receive a punishment in proportion to the harm that their negligence caused. Good dogs, in the hands of irresponsible owners, should sometimes be taken away from the owners and given to a good home.

I also don't believe that we should expect every dog to like everybody. That is unnatural, and I don't think that the public should expect that every dog should be petted, interacted with, liked, and/or handled by any person that comes up to interact with your dog without your express permission. I also don't think that dogs or owners should be judged by "what if" scenarios when a dog hasn't actually caused anyone any physical harm. Some folks are phobic, and afraid of dogs. Some folks are dog haters or are just plain nuts or trouble makers, and just because they don't like a dog or don't know how to read a dog or interact with a dog, etc, they shouldn't be given the unfettered right to deem your dog as being dangerous to society or themselves. Not everyone in this world is rational, and I don't want anyone to risk having their dog taken away or cited as being dangerous, just because some nut thinks they are a dog expert and knows what is best for society.

Here are other provisions which should be incorporated:

The last time I was working to help with the drafting of a dog bite law, we came up with the following concepts. The following are ideas which should be considered when drafting dog bite laws:

Make definitions (e.g., dangerous, potentially dangerous, etc.) precise. It should be 100% clear which category a dog fits after any kind of biting incident.

There is a difference between a dog that attacks a human, another dog, and some other species. Should we categorize a dog as “dangerous” which killed a squirrel? Or a cat? What if the dog gets in a fight with another dog, which one was at fault and how do you apportion the fault? Isn’t there a difference between a dog that bites a human and one that bites another animal? Shouldn’t the law differentiate between dogs who threaten other animals, other dogs, or people? When it is animal vs. animal, shouldn’t the law differentiate between domestic and wild animals?

Whenever a dog has been designated as a potential threat by animal control, the owners should have the right to challenge the designation. In some jurisdictions, a dog can be labeled as “dangerous” or “potentially dangerous” with an unsubstantiated claim from a nasty neighbor. This designation then can count against the life of the dog if further complaints are lodged against the dog. Unless the designation can be substantiated, then such a designation should be open to challenge through due process.

The designation of potential threat (“potentially dangerous”, “dangerous”, etc.) should NOT be made by Animal Control. They are analogous to the police, and should only be able to charge someone with a violation. They shouldn’t also be able to exact a penalty on the dog or its owners. An impartial evaluation board, comprised of dog experts, should make these designations.

There should be uniformity across jurisdictions, instead of having each city enact its own set of dog laws, which might conflict with one another. It is too hard for the average citizen to wade through the hodgepodge of laws in most states.

Dogs and owners should be allowed to complete training and behavioral modification programs to remove the “potentially dangerous” and “dangerous” designations. That is what dog trainers and behaviorists are for. Many dogs and people can be turned around with proper training and supervision.

“Unprovoked” biting should be specifically clarified. When a dog gets in a fight with another dog, the innocent dog isn’t always the one that got hurt the worst. It takes a trained eye to tell which dog started the fight. It can be a look, or a set of body language cues which sets off a fight. In many cases, novice dog owner, and most animal control officers, won’t be able to tell who started the fight, nor which dog was at fault.

An animal dangerous to humans means any of the following: Any animal which, when unprovoked and off the property of his owner or keeper, inflicts severe injury on or kills a human being. Any animal previously determined to be potentially dangerous to humans, which, within a 24 month period after its owner or keeper has received notice of this determination, inflicts less than severe injury on a human being, when unprovoked and off the property of his owner or keeper.

An animal potentially dangerous to other animals means any of the following: Any animal which, when unprovoked and off the property of the owner or keeper, on three separate occasions within the prior 36-month period, engages in behavior that threatens the safety of another domestic animal so that the other animal has to take defensive action to protect itself. Instinctual behavior by a dog such as barking at or chasing a cat will not be deemed a sign of being potentially dangerous if the cat gets away, as usually happens. Any animal which, when unprovoked and off the property of the owner or keeper, inflicts less than severe injury on another domestic animal.

An animal potentially dangerous to humans means any of the following: Any animal which, when unprovoked and off the property of the owner or keeper, on two separate occasions within the prior 36-month period, engages in behavior that threatens the safety of a human being so that the human has to take defensive action to protect himself/herself. Any animal which, when unprovoked and off the property of the owner or keeper, bites a person and breaks the skin, but causes less than severe injury.

Provocation: The act of inciting an animal to be aggressive. Examples include but are not limited to: striking or otherwise hurting the animal, teasing or tormenting the animal, trespassing on the owner’s property, committing a crime against an innocent person, committing a crime against the owner or his property, threatening the owner, or hurting or threatening the animal’s young. These examples also apply to incidents in the past which have been observed or reported.

Exotic animal: Any normally wild animal which, when in its wild state, is capable of inflicting serious physical harm on a human being.

Severe injury: Any physical injury that results in broken bones or disfiguring lacerations requiring multiple sutures or cosmetic surgery.

Less than severe injury: Any physical injury that breaks the skin but does not result in broken bones or disfiguring lacerations requiring multiple sutures or cosmetic surgery.

Declaration that an animal is potentially dangerous to other animals; potentially dangerous to humans; dangerous to other animals; or dangerous to humans.

(1) If the Director has investigated and determined that there exists probable cause to believe that an animal is potentially dangerous to other animals; potentially dangerous to humans; dangerous to other animals; or dangerous to humans as defined in this ordinance, a hearing shall be conducted unless knowingly waived in writing by the animal owner. The Director shall prepare a petition specifying the basis for the applicable designation.

(2) Whenever possible, any complaint received from a member of the public which serves as the evidentiary basis for the Director to find probable cause shall be sworn to and verified by the complainant and shall be attached to the petition.

(3) Whenever possible, if injury is alleged, relevant medical reports and photographs shall be attached to the petition.

(4) Prior to commencement of the hearing and if the allegations in the petition indicate that the animal is potentially dangerous to other animals; potentially dangerous to humans; or dangerous to other animals, the Mayor or his designee may offer in writing mediation services as an alternative to a hearing provided both the complainant and owner agree in writing to mediation. Mediation must be concluded within thirty days of the offer to mediate. If mediation is refused or is unsuccessful, then the matter shall be referred to a hearing as defined below.

The Mayor or his designee shall designate a hearing officer from a panel of up to five persons whose membership shall be designated by the City Council. Hearing officer applicants shall have had a minimum of five years experience as a practicing attorney and at least minimal experience in the care and control of animals. The hearing officer shall conduct a hearing on whether an animal shall be declared potentially dangerous to other animals, potentially dangerous to humans, dangerous to other animals, or dangerous to humans. The hearing officer shall be compensated for the actual hours devoted to the hearing and its determination at the existing rate allowed magistrates of the Municipal Court.

The Mayor or his designee shall provide written notice to the owner of the specific behavior of the animal alleged in the petition and the date upon which a hearing will be held to consider the petition. The hearing shall be held not more than 15 days after service of the notice upon the owner. The notice shall advise the owner of the consequences of a finding of potentially dangerous to other animals, potentially dangerous to humans, dangerous to other animals, or dangerous to humans. The notice shall advise the owner of his right to present evidence as to why the animal should receive the alleged designation and of his right to appeal to the Superior Court within 15 days of the final determination.

A hearing may be continued if the hearing officer deems it necessary and proper or upon a showing of good cause.

The time for hearing shall be stayed if mediation services are accepted. The time for hearing and the hearing provisions of this subsection shall recommence at the date the Mayor or his designee has determined that mediation has not been accepted or has been unsuccessful.

In cases where complaints from the public serve as the evidentiary basis for the director to prepare a petition, at least one of the complainants or his or her designee in the matter must appear and testify at the hearing or the complaint shall be dismissed.

If the owner fails to appear at the hearing, the hearing shall nevertheless proceed and an appropriate order shall be issued.

All witnesses shall testify under oath or affirmation. The oath shall be administered by the hearing officer. The hearing officer may, when appropriate, request the production of oral or documentary evidence which is reasonably necessary and relevant to conduct a hearing. All proceedings shall be tape recorded.

The hearing officer shall issue a written determination based upon a preponderance of the evidence, which shall be mailed to the owner within seven days after the hearing is completed.

If an animal is found to be potentially dangerous to other animals, dangerous to other animals, or potentially dangerous to humans, the animal shall be so designated on the records of Animal Control and the owner’s yard inspected and certified to be sufficiently secure to contain the animal. Fencing with footers, if necessary, that is sufficiently high to contain the animal concerned may be ordered as well as a locked gate. If the animal is outside of the yard or the owner’s home, he will be on a secure leash under the control of a responsible person.

If an animal is found to be dangerous to humans, he shall be registered and regulated.

An owner of an animal found potentially dangerous to other animals, potentially dangerous to humans, or dangerous to other animals, who has no additional violations within a thirty-six month period from the date of the designation, shall be removed form the list of animals so designated by the Director. The animal may be, but is not required to be, removed from the relevant list prior to the expiration of the 36 month period if the owner or keeper of the dog demonstrates to the Director that changes in circumstances or measures taken by the owner or keeper, such as training of the dog, have mitigated the risk to public safety.

An owner of a dog found dangerous to humans, who has no additional violations after a 36 month period from the date of designation as dangerous to humans, may apply to the Director to remove the animal from the list of dangerous to humans upon proof of the successful completion of at least 8 weeks of formal obedience training, other similar evidence of training, or other rehabilitative efforts designed to mitigate the risk to public safety.

The owner may file a replevin action in Superior Court without court costs within 30 days of seizure to contest the holding of the animal. Failure to file will constitute a waiver of the owner’s right to a hearing. [Reason: due process.]