LilMtnCbn
06-23-2004, 09:20 AM
There IS adoption content in here. You just have to look really really hard.
LOL
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2004/06/23/muzzle_or_nuzzle/
Muzzle or nuzzle?
Council to mull pitbull restraints following attacks
By Donovan Slack, Globe Staff | June 23, 2004
Ethan Eddy sees the fear. It's there almost every time he walks Maggie and
Toby, the pitbulls he adopted, around his Jamaica Plain neighborhood. Sometimes
all it takes is the silhouette of their signature boxy heads.
"One woman started screaming, 'Get that thing away from me. That thing needs to
be killed; there's no place for that in the city!' " Eddy recalled.
So when news of a pitbull attack in Hyde Park Friday spread, triggering a
torrent of complaints to city officials and prompting calls for tougher
animal-control laws, Eddy's heart sank.
Today, the City Council takes up a proposal that would require pitbull owners
to muzzle their dogs in public, spay or neuter them, and post warning signs
outside their homes -- reopening a recurring argument over a breed that has
inspired fierce public debates.
Pitbull owners like Eddy say their dogs are no more prone to attacks than any
other. But opponents cite statistics showing pitbulls have attacked in Boston
more than any other breed.
"I have gotten calls about this all weekend long," said City Councilor Rob
Consalvo of last week's attack near a Waterloo Street apartment complex. In
that attack, a pitbull bit an exterminator, then mauled a small dog outside,
and bit an animal-control officer before police shot and killed the dog.
"The bottom line is there's a problem, and we need to start admitting there's a
problem," said Consalvo, who sponsored the measure to be voted on today. He
said seven attacks have occurred in his district in the past year. Consalvo
represents Hyde Park and parts of Roslindale and West Roxbury.
Animal rights activists nationwide have argued for years against attempts to
restrict pitbulls, saying such rules unfairly blame a category of dogs for
attacks they say are better attributed to abusive or neglectful owners. And in
some cases, the courts have supported that argument. In Lynn, ordinances
banning and restricting pitbull ownership were struck down by the Supreme
Judicial Court in 1989 because, the court ruled, there were no scientific means
for determining which dogs are pitbulls.
Still, some restrictions have been put into place. In 2002, the state
Department of Social Services began following guidelines that disqualify
adoptive parents who own pitbulls, Rottweilers, or German shepherds because
they are considered "high bite" breeds.
Many pet owners and animal rights advocates say restrictions tend to be adopted
in the wake of attacks, when fears run high. Several of those advocates
criticized today's City Council proposal, saying it would not stem the number
of attacks, because most are perpetrated by unlicensed dogs, whose owners are
unlikely to conform with additional restrictions. The pitbull in the most
recent attack in Boston was not registered or immunized.
"If they're not going to invest a couple of dollars in a license and
vaccinations, they certainly aren't going to invest in a sign," said Kara
Holmquist, director of advocacy for the Massachusetts Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
Holmquist and other advocates said they recommend tougher penalties for
violations of leash laws, more animal control officers, and a crackdown on
unregistered dogs in the city. Holmquist said thousands of dogs are unlicensed
in Boston, with some estimates running as high as 22,000. City animal control
officials said that of the 8,000 registered dogs, about 5 percent, or 411, are
pitbulls.
Saying the city should not single out pitbulls, City Councilor Maura A.
Hennigan filed her own proposed ordinance yesterday. Her initiative would
increase fines for leash violations and dog bites, and also require animal
control to launch an education program to encourage citizens to report dogs
that are off-leash. "To just go after pitbulls doesn't make any sense," she
said.
But Consalvo argued that current laws are not enough to stop pitbull attacks.
Boston law requires all dogs on public property to be on a leash, but Consalvo
said some pitbulls strike whether or not they are leashed.
The name pitbull refers to several types of dog, including American pitbull
terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, and Staffordshire bull terriers.
They are often the dog of choice for gang members, who may train them to fight
and use them to ward off neighbors and adversaries, the city's animal control
director said.
But in recent years, pitbulls have become more popular with responsible pet
owners, said Alan Borgal, who has worked at the Animal Rescue League of Boston
for nearly 30 years.
"Now they're all over the place," said Borgal, director of law enforcement for
the rescue league. "A few years ago, I would not have expected a pitbull in
that apartment in Hyde Park."
Borgal contends pitbull ownership is nothing but a passing fad. German
shepherds were the guard dog of choice in the late '70s, he recalled. Then
Doberman pinschers were favored, followed by Rottweilers, and now pitbulls.
Borgal was attacked twice by pitbulls in the late '90s, and suffered back
injuries and nerve damage in his hand, but he said he still believes the dogs
should not be singled out for restrictions. He said that a knee-jerk vote after
last week's attack is not the way to go.
"People become very antidog in these situations, and you have to be careful,"
he said.
For Hyde Park resident Sandra Scaccia, the muzzling of pitbulls in city streets
is anything but antidog. She said her 9-year-old chow, Jinx, was nearly killed
last year by the same pitbull, named Bugsy, involved in last week's attack. She
was walking Jinx last June when Bugsy raced across Neponset Valley Parkway and
clenched his jaw around her dog's neck, she recalled. Bugsy's owners managed to
pry him loose with a broomstick.
Scaccia heard the gunshots Friday and later saw the dog dead.
"I feel bad for the owners, but to some extent it was a relief because I no
longer fear the dog is in the neighborhood," said Scaccia, a firm supporter of
Consalvo's legislation.
But Eddy, the pitbull owner from Jamaica Plain, said that if the council passes
the restrictions today and the mayor signs them into law, he would consider it
a "slap in the face."
"Those of us who believe in the laws and would follow them are going to be the
ones that are punished by this," he said. "My personal solution is, we're just
going to move if this happens."
-------------------------
A good friend will come and bail you out of jail . . . but, a true friend will
be sitting next to you saying, "Damn . . . that was fun!"
-----Unknown
LOL
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2004/06/23/muzzle_or_nuzzle/
Muzzle or nuzzle?
Council to mull pitbull restraints following attacks
By Donovan Slack, Globe Staff | June 23, 2004
Ethan Eddy sees the fear. It's there almost every time he walks Maggie and
Toby, the pitbulls he adopted, around his Jamaica Plain neighborhood. Sometimes
all it takes is the silhouette of their signature boxy heads.
"One woman started screaming, 'Get that thing away from me. That thing needs to
be killed; there's no place for that in the city!' " Eddy recalled.
So when news of a pitbull attack in Hyde Park Friday spread, triggering a
torrent of complaints to city officials and prompting calls for tougher
animal-control laws, Eddy's heart sank.
Today, the City Council takes up a proposal that would require pitbull owners
to muzzle their dogs in public, spay or neuter them, and post warning signs
outside their homes -- reopening a recurring argument over a breed that has
inspired fierce public debates.
Pitbull owners like Eddy say their dogs are no more prone to attacks than any
other. But opponents cite statistics showing pitbulls have attacked in Boston
more than any other breed.
"I have gotten calls about this all weekend long," said City Councilor Rob
Consalvo of last week's attack near a Waterloo Street apartment complex. In
that attack, a pitbull bit an exterminator, then mauled a small dog outside,
and bit an animal-control officer before police shot and killed the dog.
"The bottom line is there's a problem, and we need to start admitting there's a
problem," said Consalvo, who sponsored the measure to be voted on today. He
said seven attacks have occurred in his district in the past year. Consalvo
represents Hyde Park and parts of Roslindale and West Roxbury.
Animal rights activists nationwide have argued for years against attempts to
restrict pitbulls, saying such rules unfairly blame a category of dogs for
attacks they say are better attributed to abusive or neglectful owners. And in
some cases, the courts have supported that argument. In Lynn, ordinances
banning and restricting pitbull ownership were struck down by the Supreme
Judicial Court in 1989 because, the court ruled, there were no scientific means
for determining which dogs are pitbulls.
Still, some restrictions have been put into place. In 2002, the state
Department of Social Services began following guidelines that disqualify
adoptive parents who own pitbulls, Rottweilers, or German shepherds because
they are considered "high bite" breeds.
Many pet owners and animal rights advocates say restrictions tend to be adopted
in the wake of attacks, when fears run high. Several of those advocates
criticized today's City Council proposal, saying it would not stem the number
of attacks, because most are perpetrated by unlicensed dogs, whose owners are
unlikely to conform with additional restrictions. The pitbull in the most
recent attack in Boston was not registered or immunized.
"If they're not going to invest a couple of dollars in a license and
vaccinations, they certainly aren't going to invest in a sign," said Kara
Holmquist, director of advocacy for the Massachusetts Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
Holmquist and other advocates said they recommend tougher penalties for
violations of leash laws, more animal control officers, and a crackdown on
unregistered dogs in the city. Holmquist said thousands of dogs are unlicensed
in Boston, with some estimates running as high as 22,000. City animal control
officials said that of the 8,000 registered dogs, about 5 percent, or 411, are
pitbulls.
Saying the city should not single out pitbulls, City Councilor Maura A.
Hennigan filed her own proposed ordinance yesterday. Her initiative would
increase fines for leash violations and dog bites, and also require animal
control to launch an education program to encourage citizens to report dogs
that are off-leash. "To just go after pitbulls doesn't make any sense," she
said.
But Consalvo argued that current laws are not enough to stop pitbull attacks.
Boston law requires all dogs on public property to be on a leash, but Consalvo
said some pitbulls strike whether or not they are leashed.
The name pitbull refers to several types of dog, including American pitbull
terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, and Staffordshire bull terriers.
They are often the dog of choice for gang members, who may train them to fight
and use them to ward off neighbors and adversaries, the city's animal control
director said.
But in recent years, pitbulls have become more popular with responsible pet
owners, said Alan Borgal, who has worked at the Animal Rescue League of Boston
for nearly 30 years.
"Now they're all over the place," said Borgal, director of law enforcement for
the rescue league. "A few years ago, I would not have expected a pitbull in
that apartment in Hyde Park."
Borgal contends pitbull ownership is nothing but a passing fad. German
shepherds were the guard dog of choice in the late '70s, he recalled. Then
Doberman pinschers were favored, followed by Rottweilers, and now pitbulls.
Borgal was attacked twice by pitbulls in the late '90s, and suffered back
injuries and nerve damage in his hand, but he said he still believes the dogs
should not be singled out for restrictions. He said that a knee-jerk vote after
last week's attack is not the way to go.
"People become very antidog in these situations, and you have to be careful,"
he said.
For Hyde Park resident Sandra Scaccia, the muzzling of pitbulls in city streets
is anything but antidog. She said her 9-year-old chow, Jinx, was nearly killed
last year by the same pitbull, named Bugsy, involved in last week's attack. She
was walking Jinx last June when Bugsy raced across Neponset Valley Parkway and
clenched his jaw around her dog's neck, she recalled. Bugsy's owners managed to
pry him loose with a broomstick.
Scaccia heard the gunshots Friday and later saw the dog dead.
"I feel bad for the owners, but to some extent it was a relief because I no
longer fear the dog is in the neighborhood," said Scaccia, a firm supporter of
Consalvo's legislation.
But Eddy, the pitbull owner from Jamaica Plain, said that if the council passes
the restrictions today and the mayor signs them into law, he would consider it
a "slap in the face."
"Those of us who believe in the laws and would follow them are going to be the
ones that are punished by this," he said. "My personal solution is, we're just
going to move if this happens."
-------------------------
A good friend will come and bail you out of jail . . . but, a true friend will
be sitting next to you saying, "Damn . . . that was fun!"
-----Unknown
