Good news.

I just found out from the BadRap Blog that Florida's HB101 is dead.

The ill-conceived Bill had planned to revoke Florida's statewide prohibition against banning dogs because of their physical appearance.

It hasn't hit the mainstream media yet, so that's all I know at this point.

Since he's such a freaking expert.

Here's how animal pound workers are deciding who is a Fib-Bull and who isn't.

http://www.mississaugablogs.com/2008/03/all_in_favour_of_a_stay_of_exe.html

Aren't you proud to live in Ontaristan?

Now, get back in line.  Forward, march!

PS I forgot to thank Mac for the heads-up about the story. 

Guy Walking his 'Pit Bull'

That crazy Mac asks whether Dolton is trying to kill the people in other provinces, most notably Quèbec.

I've wondered about that, too.  If nonexistent, preternaturally endowed 'pit bulls' are unsafe at any age, then why is it OK to ship them to other provinces when charging people?

Let's say somebody thinks your dog is a 'pit bull' and they decide to charge you with a violation.

That's when the three charming options kick in:

1. The dog is put to death

2. The dog is shipped out of province

3. The dog is sent to a research facility for some what-if experiments

Why is it OK to export these so-called dangerous dogs.  Are people in other provinces tougher, more balanced, more experienced, or what's the deal?

Mac's got some info about our old friend Mr Algar from Peterborough in her post.  He is shipping some pups to another province to keep them out of the dog-killers' clutches.

Good on you, Brad.

Are you mad enough yet?

Help us win the case against Ontario.  We're doing the work, all we need is money.

Donate to Banned Aid:  http://www.doglegislationcouncilcanada.org/donate.html

Somebody must have doped the water supply in Florida.  Or maybe the natives have been out in the sun too long.

The unschooled have decided that shapes of dogs should be eliminated in order to prevent bites, attacks and maulings.

Why anyone believes that this goofy idea is sensible continues to mystify me.

Florida has a state-wide prohibition on banning 'breeds' of dogs, yet Miami-Dade has had a 'pit bull' ban in place for 20 years.

Get this:  They have no idea whether or not it is working because they have no statistics available for analysis.  They only started keeping track of dog incidents in 2005.

How can you bring in an oppressive, counterintuitive plan to kill dogs based on their looks without even having baseline information available?  How can you decide to make people's (and dogs') lives miserable without having any facts on hand?

Of course, Peta supports the idea.  Why is anybody soliciting their opinion or giving them print space?  They are killers.  They want all dogs dead.  The media are so far behind the curve on this that it's a joke.

I guess H$U$ folk are mellowing their message because they now seem to be opposed to 'breed' bans.  If that is their actual policy, I say it's about time, since they, too, get lots of press coverage.  If they are now prepared to speak to fairness and common sense, I'll reverse my opinion of them but I'll wait to see how things unfold.  They are still anti-No Kill and still promote mandatory sterilization - the kinder, gentler way to exterminate domestic dogs.

Anyway, here's the story in the Miami Herald. 

*

In other news, a fundraiser to help homeless 'pit bulls' was canceled in Independence, MO (gotta laugh at the town's name) because of 'community sensitivity' about 'pit bulls'.  No money for 'pit bulls' in that burg.

Memo to Missouri 'Pit Bull' Rescue:  Change your name. 

There's no such thing as a 'pit bull' and the trogs find that label scary. 

All these 'pit bull' groups are not helping, by chattering on and on about 'pit bulls', running 'pit bull' specific courses, discussing the merits of 'pit bulls', posting pictures of 'pit bulls' on their websites and generally giving the enemy ammo to use against dog owners.

Also, next time you fundraise, you don't have to shout it from the rooftops - just say the money is going towards helping homeless dogs.

Duh.

More here.

Remember this?

http://caveat.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2006/5/24/1981849.html

In Ontario these days, discrimination based on appearance which is based on mythology is de rigeur.  The trogs have swallowed the pitbullshit hook, line and sinker.

In Brantford this week, a dog owner went to buy a licence for her dog.  For reasons unknown at this point, she forgot to buy one last year. wasn't shown in the city's files as having bought one for 2007.

Guess what the penalty for not buying a dog tag is in Brantford, if they think you own a mythical 'pit bull'?

Here it is from the owner's email:

On Friday Feb. 15 2008 I went to city hall to get Heira her 2008 dog license. There I am told that we did not get her a 2007 dog license, thus we have three options.

1) Find her a home out of Brantford
2) Kill her
3) Let the SPCA take her

This is all because of City of Brantford Municipal Codes Chapter 206 ("the pit-bull ban"). She had been "grandfathered" in, but by not getting her 2007 license she forfeits that clause..

Since 90% of people don't buy dog tags in Ontario, I guess the courtrooms and pounds are going to be awfully crowded.

Ontario, why I hate it.