More cities banning dog breeds
By Shadrach on May 5, 2008 in Dog Laws, Rescue & Welfare
Well this just has my hackles up so high my neck wrinkles are involved, grrrrr! Now why are so many breeds being methodically banned city by city…take a look at who is behind these bans and you may begin to see a pattern. The same folks who on the front profess to be for our protection and profess love of animals. Makes no sense unless you look at the worldwide big picture. I won’t elaborate further bepaws then I might get labeled a scary conspiracy theorist. Banning and mandatory spay/neuter of all of us sounds like dog genocide to me and it is also all VERY unconstitutional! But hey, only the masses have to obey the laws, certainly not the powers that be, WOOF!
Hey, all I want is to BE…and to eat good, natural REAL food, and have REAL fresh water, and to be loved. Humans just have to complicate things for two reasons: money and power…power and money. Bunch of boneheads, WOOF!
the news:
Bye, Bye Fido: One Central Wis. Village Enacts Ordinance Banning Certain Breed of Dog
All Pitbulls, Dobermans, and Rottweilers Now Banned in Kenmare, ND
***Note***: As of April 23, 2008 Hardeman County, TN passed a unanimous vote banning the ownership, harboring, or possession of Pit Bulls, including Bull Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, American Bull Terriers and American Staffordshire Terriers. The resolution also bans the ownership of mixed breeds that have the same appearance and characteristics of the above-mentioned breeds – left up to the discretion of Animal Control officers I might add…hmmm.
Get involved to END breed bans! Listen to the Dog Legislation show on BlogTalk Radio, and participate with Paws 4 Laws.
Have a pawsitively tail waggin’, BSL-free, PRO dog day, WOOF!
Bark ‘N’ Blog is brought to you by Aspenbloom Natural Pet Care
RSS feed
3 Comment(s)
By Marie on May 5, 2008 | Reply
I wish you’d tell us what you really think, even risking being called a “scary conspiracy theorist” to do so. I’d love to know what you suspect. Do you think it’s a PETA thing, and that they’ll aim for one breed after another until no dogs are legal?
By Bob on May 5, 2008 | Reply
Shadrach probably whimpers when he thinks about it too much.
Read The Future of Dogs ( http://www.pet-law.com/future/intro.html ) and maybe you’ll understand the concern. It isn’t half-baked or reactionary. It’s very well thought out and documented.
PETA may kill more animals each year than it saves worldwide (petakillsanimals.com) and HSUS spends more on lobbying than it does on direct animal welfare supporting local humane societies and animal shelters.
The way both of those organizations used the Michael Vick dogfighting story is shameful. They collected millions playing on peoples’ emotions but have had zero involvement with the dogs, many of which are or have been rehabilitated, despite their call to kill all of the dogs. Equally shameful is PETA’s reaction to Eight Belles death and their delay in reporting the downer cow investigation among the long list of transgressions.
PETA and HSUS are the national leads in a network of associated state and local organizations, one of which we must try to work with on a regular basis in NM. That organization’s leader has stated that no one should have pets (and that children are a nuisance). I can only assume her parents are ashamed.
By Shadrach on May 6, 2008 | Reply
Bob, thank you for sharing your very astute and knowledgeable response to Marie here.
Marie, here is what I think, written in a long three article series I wrote earlier this year. Now you must read all three to get the entire context of my message. The first might lend you to believe I think a certain way but the other two pull it all together in context:
Come to the Edge, Part One: The Scenario
Come to the Edge, Part Two: The Questions
Come to the Edge, Part Three: The Conclusion
I invite you to join us on http://www.breakthematrix.com to learn more about this worldwide situation we are all facing. It is MUCH deeper and wider than banning dogs.
Dr. Kim & Shadrach