[ SHOWGSD-L ] Fwd: Dogs Declared Viscious in OWN YARD & Worse-HB 1982 Hearing Monday!
- From: Scharo777@xxxxxxx
- To: showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 11:20:03 EDT
____________________________________
From: ZeeAngel The PRO-DOG, Pro-Breeder Attorney
Here is a BAD bill that we need help DEFEATING!!! Your dog can be declared
VICIOUS contained in your own yard--READ ON because it only gets worseâ?¦
All dogs 40 pounds and over mandated to be on lead at all times and must be
in a secure enclosure meant for dogs declared dangerous--must have DANGEROUS
DOG sign on your fence even if your dog has done NOTHING if it is 40 pounds
or more.
HB 1982 (Expanding dangerous dogs laws to include vicious dogs based on
physical nature and will allow dogs to be declared vicious even if in its own
yard)
Martinez Fischer (County Affairs)
House Committee Hearing: Monday, April 6, 2009
2:00 p.m. ; Capitol Building;
Room E2.016 (2nd level down in Capitol Extension)
Need people there in Austin!!!!!!!!!!!!! FAX & CALL now!!!!!
1. This bill expands the definition of dangerous dogs to include a
category of vicious dogs. A dog could be determined to be vicious based on the
dogâ??s â??physical natureâ?? and â??vicious propensityâ?? and it being
capable of
causing serious bodily injury or death. This determination could be made
without regard to the actual dogâ??s temperament or history. So, if someone
thinks
your dog looks scary, you are in the crosshairs of this proposed law.
2. The definition of a vicious dog would include one that without
reasonable provocation habitually acts in a way that the owner should know it
is likely to bite or attack. What does this mean--the dog goes to the fence
and barks, goes to the door and barks, looks out the window and barks? What
this means is totally left up to the imagination and makes this law ripe for
abuse.
3. The definition of vicious dog would include one that commits
unprovoked acts in its enclosure that causes someone to reasonably believe
that
the dog will attack and cause bodily injury to that person. That means your
dog in its OWN yard can be declared "vicious."
4. The definition of vicious would include one that acts in a highly
aggressive manner in its enclosure and appears to a reasonable person that
it is able to escape. That means that if someone even thinks your dog could
get out, your dog can be declared vicious even though it is NEVER gotten out.
5. This bill would allow the court to destroy a dog that causes
serious bodily injury to a trespasser in its own enclosure if the trespasser
is
less than 15 years of age. The law currently provides an exception for
destroying the dog if the trespasser was at least 8 years of age. This
addresses a
dog in its own yard. Unfortunately, it today's world many felons20are
teenagers.
6. This bill would expand the felony dog bite bill and make the
penalties stronger. Currently, if someoneâ??s dog gets out and causes serious
bodily injury or death, the owner can be charged with a third degree felony
for
serious bodily injury and a second degree felony if it is death. This bill
would make it a second degree felony if the victim of the attack causing
serious
bodily injury was under 15 or over 65. This felony bill is already strong
enough. A 2nd degree felony can put someone in prison for up to 20 years and a
3rd degree felony can put someone in prison for up to 10 years.
7. This bill would add a new law that requires that an owner of a
dog that weighs 40 or more pounds has to be on a leash in the immediate
control of a person, or in a residence, or in a secure enclosure in cities
with a
population of more than 1 million. A secure enclosure is one that is required
for dangerous dogs. So, essentially, all dogs 40 pounds or more are treated
like they are already dangerous in terms of the enclosure that is required
regardless that they have NEVER done anything.
Why this Bill should be OPPOSED:
1. This bill would allow for declaring a dog vicious based on its â??
physical nature.â?? That is an attempt to target breeds of dogs and is breed
specific legislation by a different name. This determination could be made
with
no regard for the dogâ??s actual temperament or history.
2. This bill would allow for a dog to be declared vicious based on
things it allegedly does in its own enclosure without the dog ever getting
out. This law would punish20people who contain their dogs in an enclosure and
yet, this is exactly what we want them to do instead of letting the dogs run
loose.
3. The bill would allow the unfair targeting of dogs that have not
done anything other that perhaps bark at the fence to be declared vicious
which subjects the owner to the same requirement as owners of dangerous dogs
that
have bitten someone and caused injury.
4. Dangerous dog cases are often more about the relationships of
neighbors than about dogs. This bill would allow a neighbor to say he or she
is
fearful that a fenced dog might get out or that it might cause them injury
for a dog that is contained within an enclosure. This is a subjective standard
that is fraught with possibility for unfairness.
5. Requiring that owners of dogs weighing 40 pounds or more to have
a secure enclosure for their pets is tantamount to saying that all such dogs
are dangerous and should be treated as if they have been declared dangerous
without them ever doing anything. "Secu re enclosures" by state law are those
for dogs already declared dangerous. This would mean that these dog owners
would have to construct a "secure enclosure" for dogs that have never done
one thing. Here is what a "secure enclosure" means that all owners of dogs 40
pounds and over would have to comply with:
(4) "Secure enclosure" means a fenced area or structure that is:
(A) locked;
(B) capable of preventing the entry of the general public, including
children;
(C) capable of preventing the escape or release of a dog;
(D) clearly marked as containing a dangerous dog; and
(E) in conformance with the requirements for enclosures established by the
local animal control authority.
So, if you h ave to put a sign saying DANGEROUS DOG on your fence for your
dog despite that it has done NOTHING. AND, you have to comply with local
requirements for "secure enclosures." Some local requirements include
enclosures
with tops, concrete flooring, and size requirements. AGAIN, I know this sounds
crazy, but this is for ALL dogs weighing 40 pounds or more. This law would
be unfairly enforced against dogs like American Pit Bull Terriers, Rotties,
Akitas, German Shepherd Dogs, Dobies, Huskies, Malamutes, Mastiffs,
Chow-Chows,
etc.
6. Requiring 40 pound dogs or over to always be on a leash in the
immediate control of a person, in a residence or in a secure enclosure,
prevents those dogs from ever going to a dog park or participating in events
that
are off lead or allow the dog to be separate from the handler which include
tracking (dogs are on leads up to 30â?? in length), search & rescue efforts
(dogs
on long leads and move ahead of handler), herding, hunting, and being used
as working dogs and police dogs. Most dogs used in all of these activities are
over 40 pounds.
7. This bill would prohibit hunters from using a dog that is 40
pounds or over. Hunting dogs are typically over 40 pounds and include all
sorts
of dogs.
8. This bill is way too restrictive and vague and needs to be
defeated in its entirety. Our laws are strong enough.=2 0Current law provides
that
if your dog makes an unprovoked act while outside it enclosure that someone
says put them in fear of being injured, your dog can already be declared
dangerous even if it did not bite, scratch or even touch someone. It is a
subjective standard.
FAX & CALL. Email is not a good way to communicate and some of them are
blocking it now.
Be sure to put: OPPOSED TO HB 1982 or VOTE NO ON HB 1982 in bold, large
letters as your subject title.
Billâ??s Author: Trey Martinez Fischer, San Antonio
(512) 463-0616
(512) 463-4873 Fax
COUNTY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
Clerk: Revlynn Lawson
Phone: (512) 463-0760
The Capitol Address for ALL Representatives:
PO Box 2910, Austin, Texas 78768
Rep. Garnet Coleman (chair) _
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist147/coleman.php_
(http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist147/coleman.php)
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0524 FAX: (512) 463-1260
Rep. Geanie Morrison (Vice Chair) _
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist30/morrison.php_
(http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist30/morrison.php)
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0456 FAX: (512) 476-3933
Rep. Leo Berman _
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist6/welcome.htm_
(http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist6/welcome.htm)
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0584 FAX (512) 463-3217
Rep. Valinda Bolton _
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist47/bolton.php_
(http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist47/bolton.php)
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0652 FAX (512) 463-0565
Rep. Joaquin Castro
_http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist125/castro.php_
(http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist125/castro.php)
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0669 FAX (512) 463-5074
Rep. John E. Davis _
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist129/davis.php_
(http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist129/davis.php)
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0734 FAX (512) 479-6955
Rep. Marisa Marquez _
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist77/marquez.php_
(http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist77/marquez.php)
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0638 FAX (512) 463-8908
Rep. Ralph Sheffield _
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist55/sheffield.php_
(http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist55/sheffield.php)
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0630 FAX (512)322-9054
Rep. Wayne Smith _
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist128/smith.php_
(http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist128/smith.php)
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0733 FAX (512) 463-1323
____________________________________
_New Low Prices on Dell Laptops - Starting at $399_
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1220433304x1201394525/aol?redir=http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;
213540718;35046385;e)
**************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or
less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2008. All material remains the property of the original
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind
are permitted without prior permission of the original author AND of the
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE
PROSECUTED.
For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
VISIT OUR WEBSITE - http://showgsd.org
NATIONAL BLOG - http://gsdnational.blogspot.com/
============================================================================
Other related posts:
- » [ SHOWGSD-L ] Fwd: Dogs Declared Viscious in OWN YARD & Worse-HB 1982 Hearing Monday! - Scharo777
