Felons Banned From Owning Big Dogs

Convicted felons would be barred from owning aggressive dogs or those weighing more than 20 pounds under legislation Contra Costa County supervisors will consider Tuesday.

This is the best way to go after criminals who use dogs to commit crimes. For years, cities have been trying to ban pit bulls, Rottweilers and other breeds to get at their crime problems. It has gotten so bad, that Denver banned all pit bulls, and sends the police to peoples homes to seize innocent dogs so Denver can put them to death. Breed bans like this are outrageous. Even worse, once one breed is on the list, these gutless politicians keep adding breeds. In Italy, they have banned over 92 breeds of dog. This is why people call breed bans a kind of Dog Holocaust. People are blaming dogs for the actions of criminals.

Criminals use dogs to protect their drug dealing operations. By banning these thugs from owning large dogs, the police will have new tools for arresting these jerks, and in the process prevent many dog mauling incidents. This will also be useful in breaking up dog fighting/ gambling operations. And this kind of law can be used to go after animal abusers.

I don't necessarily support all the provisions of this proposed legislation, but these folks are on the right track. Sometimes in politics, you can get your main objectives, but some legislators will tack on a few less desirable provisions. That's life.

Contra Costa County

I have been in favor of denying criminals the right to own big dogs. I proposed this to some pro-dog groups several years ago. Legislators seemed to like the idea... then the ball was dropped, and the idea was never pursued... until now.

Laws like this can be used to go after drug dealers, who use pit bulls and Rottweilers to guard their drug operations. Breed bans have been enacted all over the world to address the drug dealer/ dog problem. In addition, I believe thsi kind of legislation will also prevent a wide variety of animal abuse cases, unrelated to drug dealing. Criminals of all kinds oftentimes abuse dogs, too. Dog activists, like myself, have opposed breed bans because they don'treally address the root of the problem: criminal behavior.

Breed bans target lots of innocent dogs just to go after a few criminal dog owners. "Denver gained national attention this year when it reinstated a ban and started euthanizing pit bulls." Such actions are outrageous. Denver sent police officers to people's houses to seize innocent dogs, then put those dogs to death. That is why some folks call this kind of thing a Dog Holocaust.

I'm not sure I support the remainder of the law being proposed, but these folks are on the right track. Sometimes, in order to get the main goals you want passed in a legislature, you have to compromise and accept that the lawmakers will add some other provisions that you wouldn't want in an ideal world. That's life.

Here Is How To Win

Want to know how we are going to win the right to reasonably own a dog?

We need to organize the same way they have at the National Rifle Association. Do it just like they have. Use them as a model. Make most of the same arguments, do the same things they did, and we will win, too.

a.) They have proven there are no legitimate studies which demonstrate the banning of guns lowers crime. In fact, the opposite is true.
b.) They have fought and beaten the "gun grabbers" in court, in the legislatures and in the minds of the public. It has taken many years, but the anti-gun forces have lost. Their arguments have been destroyed.
c.) They organized training clubs, raised funds, and supported their cause in all the political realms vigorously.

You can take almost every gun argument made by the gun rights activists, and insert "dog" and find a position you should take if you want to protect your right to own, train and breed a dog of any breed.

This is why you can't be a dog lover, and be politically in line with the socialist political elements wherever you live. So, if you love dogs, then you're going to have to re-evaluate your politics, or give up owning dogs. Be open minded to what I'm saying: you can't have a.) socialist big governments, b.) dog ban advocates, c.) hunting opponents, d.) environmental wackos, and/or e.) animal rights extremists on your side of the political spectrum and expect to retain the right to own, train or breed a dog.

Check out where the worst dog laws are, and the rationale behind them... and you'll always find these political factions fighting against you.

Every attempt you make to introduce fair dog bite, barking, breeding, training, and/or ownership legislation will always be opposed by these interest groups.

So choose: It's either them, or our dogs. I'll side with my dog, thank you.

We Need New Laws... And New Law Makers

A THUG whose dog suffered 20 cigarette burns and seven broken ribs was jailed for just 21 days yesterday.

Need I say more?

YOU CAN DO IT, TOO!

In 2001, I worked behind the scenes with a pro-dog group located in Seattle. We put together a candidate questionnaire just prior to the elections, which were sent to all the city council and mayoral candidates, challenging them to answer whether they were for or against changing Seattle’s terrible dog bite law.

Here is a copy of the final draft text of the questionnaire we devised…

“D.O.G. Questionnaire for Mayoral/City Council Candidates

Last fall, within a period of 6 weeks, D.O.G. (Dangerous Ordinance Group) volunteers gathered over 3,000 signatures on a petition to the City Council. The petition requested that Seattle’s Dangerous Animals law (SMC Ch. 9.25) be rewritten to correct the many problems in the current law and that public hearings be held to gather citizens’ input. This past March, Councilmember Jan Drago convened a public meeting attended by more than 300 citizens, who overwhelmingly called for changes to the current law.

D.O.G. would like to know your opinions on these questions so that we can inform voters who are interested in the topic about your views. Feel free to comment on any answer.

Do you believe that Seattle's Dangerous Animals law needs to be rewritten to:

1) Provide due process at the first notification of a "potentially dangerous" behavior, so that pet owners who feel that their pet did nothing to deserve such a notice have the right to appeal to an impartial third party? (Currently, no such appeal right exists.)
___Y ___N

2) Create a process to give pet owners the right to cross-examine the complainant before an incident is entered on an animal's record? (Currently, complainants can choose to remain anonymous, giving the pet owner no way to dispute an accusation.)
___Y ___N

3) Tighten the definitions of what constitutes "potentially dangerous" and "dangerous" behavior, so as to better target dogs that are truly dangerous and exclude dogs that are just behaving like normal dogs? (Currently, any behavior that anyone feels is “menacing” can lead to such a notice. “Menacing” is a subjective term—and, for those who are afraid of dogs, can encompass many normal dog behaviors.) ___Y ___N

4) Define different categories of bites, with the penalty matched to the degree of seriousness, and euthanasia reserved only for the most serious attacks? (Currently, any dog deemed dangerous must be killed or—optionally, in some cases—permanently exiled to an animal shelter in Utah, which will never allow the dog’s owner to see it again. And a “dangerous” designation can result from nothing more than two “potentially dangerous” notices—which may not even involve a bite.)
___Y ___N

5) Allow training as an alternative disciplinary action in cases that involve less serious actions or injuries? (The current law does not provide for training as an option.)
___Y ___N

6) Expunge a "potentially dangerous" or "dangerous" designation from a dog's record if there are no repeat offenses within a specified period of time? (Under the current law, these designations remain on a dog’s record for the life of the dog. If the owner is ever unable to keep the dog, such a designation virtually guarantees that the dog will be euthanized rather than adopted into a new home.)
___Y ___N

7) Require neighborhood notification and identification of problem cat before allowing private citizens to trap cats? (Cats are legally allowed to run loose—but the current law allows anyone to trap them without notifying the neighborhood first or identifying the problem cat and the damage it has caused.)
___Y ___N

For more information about problems with the current law, visit… (now defunct web page address)

Every candidate answered all these questions. Then, the group widely published the results. The group was set up as a 501 c 3 non-profit, educational organization. Though prohibited from lobbying or endorsing any particular candidate, the survey results spoke for themselves. You could tell who was reasonable and who wasn’t. The current mayor of Seattle filled out the survey in a pro-dog manner… that should tell you how important this issue was at the time of the election.

Do you have upcoming elections in your town, county, or state? Then you could organize the same kind of effort, and start holding the local politicians to taking a pro-dog or anti-dog position. With the razor thin win/lose margins of today’s elections, your pro-dog group could determine the politics of your region. Think on that!

More to come later. I have learned quite a bit about how to organize such a campaign. I’m interested in forming a new group for this purpose. Let me know if you are interested.

SIX YEARS? HOW ABOUT SIX HUNDRED YEARS?

“A BRITISH court has jailed a woman for six weeks for boiling the family cat to death in a washing machine in front of her daughters.”

Other relevant questions:

Doesn’t it encourage animal abusers to give them such a short prison sentence? They figure they can take it, and come back to do another crime another time. I once knew a local public defender who oftentimes was assigned to defend abusive husbands in court. She said that the short sentences emboldened them to come back out and hurt their wives again. They could say to their wives “I’ll be back in 6 weeks to beat you again.”

I heard of a story of a thug who lived in British Columbia. He was arrested over and over again. He would purposely engage the police in physical fights. He’d then get sentenced, to a typical lenient Canadian sentence, then come back to the community to terrorize the people there. While in prison, he’d lift weights, and learn from his fellow prisoners how to get away with new crimes when he got out.

Then, one day, he decided to go to Mexico and pull that same kind of crap. Only there, they tossed him in jail, and chained him to a wall for a couple of years. Prisons are rough there, and you can bet he became some big boy’s “bitch”.

After that, he came home… no more muscles and no more attitude. And he didn’t re-offend. Hmmm…

Why weren’t her parental rights taken away by the court? A nut like this, who boils a cat to death in front of her kids, and shows no remorse should be permanently removed from society, and lose all parental rights. What does this kind of pansy sentence teach these kids? That they are hostage to this wacko when she gets back. Imagine how intimidating this was to her kids.

“Thacker said she had set the dial at 90 degrees Celsius. According to a veterinarian, the cat would have taken five to 10 minutes to die. Fluffy broke its claws trying to escape.”

I can’t even imagine what this cat went through. And you can bet this wasn’t the first time this wacko hurt or threatened this cat.

What kind of sick society have we become?

“Speaking after the case Mr Melloy said: "In the seven years I have been working for the RSPCA as an animal inspector, I have never come across anything as heartless as this.

"It was a deliberate act of cruelty and she knew the cat would die in the washing machine. I hope this sends a very strong message to anyone who is capable of doing anything like this that society will not tolerate it and if we find you we will prosecute you."

Well, I hope you lose your job. And same goes for the judge and the legislators who allow criminal like this to come back home and into society in just six weeks.

WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND…

“The author of a new state law that allows felony charges against owners of dangerous dogs was hospitalized over the weekend after his own dog attacked him.”

You know, there is an old saying that seems apropos in this situation:

“Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.”

How often are these stupid dog laws enacted, and then many dogs are unnecessarily condemned to die?

I’ve seen it. I’ve had customers who had to deal with unjust dog bite laws.

When a terrible attack occurs, politicians run for cover and pass obnoxious and unfair laws to silence the outraged. Then, years pass, and we all have to live with the laws that were passed in the heat of passion.

I have some suggestions: How To Make A Fair Dog Bite Law…

My Philosophy... On Dogs!

Companion dogs enrich human lives through their unique capacity for partnership, shaped by thousands of years of co-evolution with people. From an ethological viewpoint, this relationship reflects mutual adaptations—dogs exhibit remarkable social cognition, emotional responsiveness, and behavioral flexibility, as illuminated in Konrad Lorenz's studies of imprinting and interspecies bonds. In professional training informed by real-world observations, a guiding philosophy centers on respecting these innate qualities while fostering reliable, harmonious coexistence. This article outlines core principles that emphasize humane understanding, clear communication, and fulfillment of natural needs.
Dogs thrive when their evolutionary heritage is acknowledged. They are not blank slates but individuals with predispositions toward social affiliation, exploration, and problem-solving—functions analyzed through Niko Tinbergen's framework of causation, development, function, and phylogeny. Effective companionship builds on these traits rather than suppressing them, promoting environments where dogs can express adaptive behaviors appropriately.
Key principles include:

• Joyful Partnership: Training succeeds when dogs find satisfaction in shared activities, aligning with their motivational drives and creating willing participation.
• Progressive Skill Mastery: Reliability develops through patient, sequential learning that respects individual pace and readiness, avoiding demands beyond current capability.
• Individual Adaptation: Methods should suit the dog's personality, breed tendencies, and history, ensuring approaches enhance rather than override natural inclinations.
• Ethical Welfare: Interactions prioritize gentle guidance grounded in behavioral science, supporting emotional well-being and trust.
• Passion and Connection: Strong outcomes stem from genuine respect for dogs as sentient partners, combined with consistent owner engagement.

Sustainable success requires collaboration—owners actively participating in routines that reinforce clarity and mutual enjoyment. This philosophy views dogs as valued companions whose potential unfolds through understanding and thoughtful stewardship.
In conclusion, embracing an ethologically informed approach cultivates deeper bonds and more balanced lives for both dogs and their human families. Owners seeking to apply these ideas are encouraged to explore structured resources or consult professionals.
This article incorporates AI-assisted drafting based on the BASSO METHOD framework and has been reviewed for accuracy, alignment with ethological principles, and adherence to these parameters.Bibliography

1. Lorenz, K. (1981). The foundations of ethology. Springer-Verlag. (Exploration of imprinting and human-animal bonds).
2. Tinbergen, N. (1963). On aims and methods of ethology. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 20(4), 410–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.1963.tb01161.x (Framework for behavioral causation, function, and adaptation).
3. SamTheDogTrainer.com. (n.d.). BASSO METHOD core documents (e.g., drive balance and partnership principles). Retrieved from https://samthedogtrainer.com [Internal reference for practical philosophy].

Another Canadian Dog Breed Ban?

Another Canadian Dog Breed Ban?
Here we go again. IT IS STUPID TO BAN SPECIFIC DOG BREEDS. People will just switch to other breeds, and the biting problems will go on and on…
<<The ownership of Rottweilers and Dobermans will soon be banned (in Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan, Canada), with the drafting of a new bylaw that puts these two breeds under the dangerous dogs category.>>

What a pile of GARBAGE. Rottweilers and Dobermans are good family dogs and safe in public. There’s no way there are so many dogs threatening people in this town that they need to pass a breed ban law. So, what about aggressive specimens? Do you know how hard it is to purchase a Rottweiler or Doberman that can do professional security or police work? If it was so easy to find such a dog, then where are they on the police departments around the world? You’ll find a handful of Rottweilers, and a handful of Dobermans in all of North America. Most dogs, of ANY breed, that bite are usually a.) poorly bred; b.) poorly socialized; c.) poorly supervised; and d.) poorly contained. In addition, we never talk about if the "victim" did something stupid to get bitten in the first place. When it is a kid, we blame the dog... instead of the kid and their idiot parents. It is politically incorrect (especially in the People's Republic of Canada) to ask for any kind of personal responsibility from people or their kids... nooooo... we blame some dumb animal and hold it to the standards of human reasoning, morality and behavior.

<<Rottweilers and Dobermans have been added to the existing list of dangerous dogs that include Staffordshire Bull Terriers, American Pit Bull Terriers and American Staffordshire Terriers, or any mixed breed involving the above. >>

Once a town bans a certain breed, they just start adding breeds to the list. In Italy, they now have a list of NINETY TWO BREEDS that are banned! Breed banning lists like this are just freaking insane.

<<Lorri Nelson, shelter manager for the Meadow Lake & District Humane Society (MLDHS), said they were looking for an alternative to breed-banning in August. “I don’t particularly support breed banning,” Nelson said. “Any dog can be dangerous regardless of breed,” she said, citing the example of an unsocialized Cocker Spaniel which can be just as menacing.>>

True. I’ve seen dangerous dogs in all the breeds, without exception.

<<According to Nelson, MLDHS proposed to Town Council to introduce a high risk license that will make it more expensive for unneutered dogs to be licensed. “The real genesis is to get people to spay or neuter,” she said. According to information from Paw Prints & Pur Inc., a non-profit organization in Louisiana, U.S., neutering decreases roaming by 90 per cent. It also reduces territoriality and aggression, including territory marking and fighting to defend it.>>

WRONG. Neutering won’t solve dog attacks. If a dog is aggressive or a fear biter, then it will continue to be aggressive or a fear biter after neutering or spaying. Most dog attacks are on a.) people the dog already knows; and b.) Someone who lives next door; and c.) most likely a male child. Neutering/ spaying won’t address any of this.

<<Statistics from the American Humane Association also reveal unneutered dogs are 2.6 times more likely to bite than neutered ones. Children are often the victims, and bites typically involve the face. >>

These types of statistics are bogus.

<<“It’s almost always children, boys under 10,” Nelson said. >>

Hmmmm… and where the heck are the parents? How is it that these dogs are getting the chance to bite these kids?

By the way, do you know what a “pit bull terrier” is? It is a cross between a terrier and a bull dog. So, I ask you morons that want to ban certain breeds of dog…

What if I cross a bulldog with a terrier? Can’t I re-create the breed all over again? And how do you prevent this? And how would you know? So, do you now ban the breeding of all bulldogs and terriers? And if you do, don’t you think that I could cross other breeds and re-create the bulldog or the terrier? Of course I could. Breed banning is a mindless solution. So are spay/ neuter laws. The CORRECT answers a.) responsible people watching their kids; b.) breeders breeding high quality dogs of all breeds; c.) cities providing space and zoning to encourage dog training and public socialization; d.) and finally, laws requiring personal responsibility. DUH!

This Pit Bull Attack Never Had To Happen

The Pooch Master is fed up!

Almost all dog attacks could be prevented with a bit of common sense.

Here is an account of a recent pit bull attack in Florida (Orlando Sentinel)

<<According to reports, a 16-year-old girl was standing in the front yard, holding the dog on a leash. She lives at the home with her brother, Epifanio Loya, 24, and Kristina Meeks, 19, the owners of the dog, deputies said.>>

Sorry to say it, but I have found that even adult women can barely hold onto the leash when a 65 lb dog is in full fight mode. Children can't control a dog like that at all. Adult men are stronger, but a dog over 90 lbs is going to be a challenge for a typical, healthy, strong 180 lb adult human male. If you aren't in good physical shape, with fast reflexes, and experienced in deploying a dog in fight mode, then you shouldn't be on the other end of the leash. A 16 year old girl shouldn’t have been on the other end of that leash, period!

<<As soon as the mother and the girl walked through the gate, the pit bull started jumping, barking and acting aggressively toward Clara, authorities said.>>

Where were the parents of this 16 year old girl? And why did the visiting mother let her small daughter keep approaching into a yard with a snarling and lunging dog? I can't tell you the number of times I've seen people continue to approach a dog that is clearly showing aggressive intent towards them. Why didn't they go back out the gate immediately?

<<When the teen could no longer hold the leash, the animal lunged at Clara, clamped down on her head and pulled her down. Her scalp was marked with deep cuts and puncture wounds, according to reports.>>

OK, this is NOT typical pit bull behavior. Sorry, but people have been breeding "freaks" that don't resemble the way any pit bull should act. Pit bulls are supposed to be PEOPLE FRIENDLY dogs. If this had been a friendly dog, this would have never happened.

<<The older girl and Martinez tried to pry open the dog's jaws, deputies said. When that didn't work, the 16-year-old ran inside to get crackers, the dog's favorite food.>>

WRONG! First, you can't pry a dog's jaws open with your hands. Forget it. Second, you can't turn off aggression with a treat. The aggression will only be terminated with the submission of either the dog or the victim.

The way to get this dog off the victim would have been to put the dog into a CHOKE HOLD, just like they teach you in jiu-jitsu. You wrap your arm around the neck of the dog and choke the dog into unconsciousness. A choke cuts off the blood supply to the brain. Strangling cuts off the windpipe. You want to choke the dog.

<<"Apparently, she thought giving it a treat would distract the dog and draw it away," said Sgt. Christie Mysinger, a sheriff's spokeswoman.>>

This wasn’t an old shoe in this dog’s mouth. This dog wasn’t in “prey” mode. It was in a state of aggression. This girl was unqualified to be handling this dog. Kids need to be educated concerning how to manage a dog. I also doubt, based upon my years of experience, this was the first time this dog showed this kind of behavior to a visitor or a stranger.

<<When the girl returned to the front yard, she saw the pit bull lunging at Martinez and clamping down on her right forearm with its jaws.>>

NOTE: Once the dog had the child in submission, the dog attacked the mother. Like I said, the dog won't end the attack until one or the other is neutralized. There was no way for them to fight and defeat this dog into submission. And they couldn’t let it put them into submission. So, they needed a different way out: a choke hold on the dog by the 16 year old girl.

<<After Martinez and the older girl pulled the dog off, they ran inside the house, with Martinez carrying her injured daughter, authorities said. Martinez and the girl called 911.>>

Geez. How did the dog attack get this far? In addition, you NEVER pull a dog off. You’ll make the injuries WORSE.

<<Clara was airlifted to ORMC with severe injuries on her head, face and chest, emergency officials said. Martinez had bites on her arms.>>

Pretty bad, eh?

<<Authorities said Loya also owns an adult female pit bull, an adolescent pit bull and a litter of puppies. All of those dogs were either leashed or in pens in the back of the property during the attacks, according to reports.>>

See? This dog was a canine misfit. Breeding is an art and a science. In the year, 2005, we have all the tools to breed and raise good, useful dogs, of any breed. A proper pit bull is a good and trustworthy dog. This dog had a screw loose, and some kid paid the price for it. I hope they never bred this dog!

This never had to happen. I blame the parents of the 16 year old, and I blame the parent of the kid who was bitten. I also blame the breeder of that dog, and whoever raised it and was responsible for its socialization, training and containment. Assuming the story was reported accurately, the parents could have prevented this from happening.