| |
 |
|
Legislation takes a turn (with some
people) |
Original Author is unknown.
This was retrieved off a newsgroup late
January 2005. It was cross-posted as
I seen it more than once. |
|
................................................................... |
Legislation
was dealt a savage blow last week in
an historic victory for American campaigners
when the Supreme Court in Alabama ruled
that there was no genetic evidence that
one breed of dog was more dangerous
than another, simply because of its
breed.
Around the world, anti-BSL campaigners
are rejoicing at the ruling that drew
on evidence provided by genuine canine
experts, which was favoured by the judges
over subjective evidence, put forward
by veterinarians and politicians. The
court ruling and the evidence used may
now be legitimately used to fight BSL
in other countries such as Germany and
Australia, as well as other US States.
In the UK, the Dangerous Dogs Act could
possibly be open to a direct legal challenge
in the same way.
The action in Alabama was brought by
the Washington Animal Foundation (WAF)
against the city of Huntsville, which
had claimed that American Pit Bull Terriers
were `genetically dangerous'. The case
centred on four Pit Bulls held in an
animal shelter and adopted by three
local women.
The dogs were survivors of a group of
over 50 Pit Bulls seized in a raid on
a dog-fighting ring in April 2000. Half
of the dogs died from injuries or disease,
whilst the reminder –including four
puppies - were held at the City pound
and put up for adoption. Shelia Tack,
an emergency room nurse at Crestwood
Hospital, adopted two of the puppies
that she named Justice and Elizabeth.
Whilst they remained impounded, she
visited them twice a week. The other
puppies, David and Nellie, were adopted
by Kay Nagel, a military officer's wife
and resident of Redstone Arsenal, and
Loyce Fisher, a civil service worker
from Cullman. However, the City Council
refused to release the dogs, stating
that they were a potential danger to
human beings, although none had apparently
displayed any aggression.
The matter was referred to court for
a legal decision on the dogs' fate.
During a hearing last year, lawyers
representing the city, Michael Fees
and Greg Burgess, told Madison County
Circuit Judge Joe Battle the animals
were vicious and should not be rehomed.
The Women, who did not have a lawyer,
argued the animals were never trained
to fight and conditioning can suppress
any vicious tendencies the dogs might
have.
Judge Battle agreed and on Nov 13 2001,
declared the four young Pit Bulls were
not dangerous because they were never
trained to fight. The court allowed
the city to destroy 21 adult Pit Bulls
which had been used for fighting. However,
the City appealed Battle's ruling to
the Alabama Supreme Court and asked
the court for an order preventing the
women from taking custody of the dogs.
At this point, Seattle-based WAF became
involved in the case and appointed Huntsville
lawyer Mike Seibert to fight their case,
based on evidence they gathered to counter
the City lawyer's claims that all Pit
Bulls were `genetically dangerous'.
The foundation hired veterinarian Dr.
Alan Jones of Hazel Green to examine
the dogs. But the officers at the shelter
do not allow anyone to have physical
contact with the pit bulls, even vet
Jones. "They looked fat and happy,"
he said. "They seemed starved for
attention and not aggressive at all"
Glen Bui, spokesman for WAF told a local
newspaper that the dogs should be released.
"I believe that the City of Huntsville
is wasting thousands of taxpayers' dollars
attempting to destroy innocent dogs
that were already given by the circuit
court to the three women,' he said.
WAF filed an Amicus (third party) submitting
genetic proof that Pit Bulls are not
dangerous. The city of Huntsville were
backed by the extremist animal rights
organisation PETA that Pit Bulls were
genetically dangerous, with evidence
provided by veterinarians, none of whom
was an expert in any specific canine
or genetical field.
WAF cited case laws under Due Process
of the law, and stated that it was unconstitutional
to rule a specific breed of dog as `dangerous'
in this way. They also claimed it was
`genocide' to try to eradicate the Pit
Bull breed.
WAF submitted evidence to the Supreme
Court that they were able to provide:
Identification of expert treatises regarding
the genetics of the breed in question
Testing and studies regarding genetics
verses environment as the catalyst for
a specific dog breed's aggression
Social contributions made by the American
Pit Bull Terrier (i.e. as Assistance
Dogs, Search and Rescue Dogs etc.)
The associations brief assisted the
court as it had substantial knowledge
concerning the issue before the court
The briefs filed by the City were insufficient
to adequately address the far reaching
issues involving genetic breed bias
The Foundation read all briefs and believed
that innocent pet owners and innocent
pets were not represented by either
brief.
WAF co-founder Glen Bui told OUR DOGS
this week: "The court granted WAF's
petition and allowed us 7 days to file
amicus curiae. Myself along with Attorney
Mike Seibert worked on the amicus long
hours into the night, while WAF members
Kay Nagel and Sheila Tack proofread
and added input. It was finished with
less than one hour before the deadline
to file and Shelia raced to the US post
office and sent it certified mail.
"Huntsville's entire case rested
on affidavits from veterinarians claiming
they examined the four Pit Bull pups
and that were would pose a danger to
the community because Pit Bulls are
genetically dangerous. They also claimed
the women had no legal right to adopt
the pups, this was also addressed in
the amicus brief."
On Friday, August 30, the Supreme Court
ruled 7-2 in WAF's favour and ordered
that the dogs should be released for
adoption, accepting the evidence but
forward by WAF that no breed of dog
is genetically dangerous.
"This is fantastic news,"
said Bui. "The city could appeal
against the ruling, but I'd like to
think they'll give way and release the
dogs to their new owners so that they
can enjoy a good life. Two of them will
be trained as Search and Rescue Dogs;
the other two will become pets. The
Pit Bulls have been evaluated and temperament
tested before they are released, they
are being spayed and neutered. The city
did tell the media that the dogs would
be released, so let's hope they keep
their word."
Bui also told OUR DOGS this week: "For
years the American Pit Bull Terrier
has been alleged to be dangerous because
of its genetics. Never has WAF found
any genetic research proving that. When
we were asked by three Huntsville women
for help, they told us nobody else would
help them, they had contacted everyone
who fights BSL. We knew the women had
to face the Supreme Court and this was
a very serious case. We knew we had
the genetic proof that no breed of dog
is dangerous.
"We knew we also had statistics
which proved the APBT has one of the
best temperaments out of 185 dog breeds
along with a strong legal defence. Being
aware that never in the past had anyone
ever argued the point, after contemplating
the outcome if the women lost, I decided
to bring WAF into the case, on the last
day before the deadline for filing briefs
in the Supreme Court WAF petitioned
for Amicus Curiae.
"This case set a standard for future
cases concerning BSL and genetics. We
put several years of research into genetics
and due process. We will use the statistics
in Ohio; we have received assistance
from state agencies in Ohio to investigate
the Lucas County Dog Warden rulings
on BSL in that State, as Ohio is totally
BSL-controlled. Dog owners in Ohio really
could use support right now. "It
was a long battle and now we have proved
the American Pit Bull terrier is not
genetically dangerous." |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
LATEST NEWS!
March 23, 2007
"Pit bulls still under ban in Ontario after law survives constitutional challenge."
READ FULL ARTICLE
....................................
|
 |
|
"UNITED WE STAND"
T-SHIRTS
TO HELP FIGHT BSL
|
|
| |
Educate Yourself and Become
a Knowledgeable
and Responsible
Dog Owner.
Links to Check Out:
.................................... |
|
