Wed
Feb 13 2008
09:26 am

For anyone who still needs convincing that pit bull bans are ineffective solutions to a communities "dog problems," please read the below article out of Kansas City, Kansas.

Dangerous dogs should be determined and classified as such based on their behavior and actions - NOT because of their physical features. Pit bull bans open a city up to liability because identification issues make it nearly impossible to determine if a dog is or is not a "pit bull."

How sad that in today's society a dog that has never done anything wrong, never posed a danger to its community and only served as a beloved family member, can be taken from that family simply because of its PHYSICAL APPEARANCE. How much time, money and energy were spent by both the city and the dog owner over the last 8 months in proving the dog in the article below was not a member of a "banned" breed? Even more frightening... how many truly dangerous dogs have slipped through this law and remain in the community simply because they do not look a pit bull?

Holding owners responsible for ANY dog that poses a danger is the only sensible, reasonalbe and fair way to achieve the ultimate goal of a safe community for all - citizens and animals alike.

Man Wins Dog Back After DNA Test Proves Dog Isn't Pit Bull

Last Edited: Tuesday, 12 Feb 2008, 8:27 PM CST
Created: Tuesday, 12 Feb 2008, 8:27 PM CST

Chalk a victory up for man's best friend in Kansas City, Kansas. A man just won his eight month legal battle with the city to keep his dog after proving it wasn't a pit bull.

For the last eight months, Niko has been living in the KCK Animal Control Kennels while his owners fought with the city. Animal Control said the dog violated the pit bull ban, but the dog's owner has said all along the dog is actually a boxer mix.

Niko has only been a free dog for a couple of days. Mike Johnson said it's obvious that eight months in the pound was tough on Niko.

"He lost some fur and has quite a bit of a cough," Johnson said. "He lost about 10-15 pounds."

This all started because the family put up an ad trying to find Niko a new home. Animal Control saw the ad and confiscated the dog, calling it a pit bull, even though paperwork called the dog a boxer.

After months of legal wrangling and a DNA test, all charges have been dropped and now they plan on keeping Niko for good.

"I don't feel it's fair at all," Johnson said. "For one they took our dog. We had documentation what type of dog it was but they wouldn't even look at that."

"People like Mike and Amy get caught in this loop, they actually had criminal charges brought up against them," Cheryl Buell with KC Dog Advocates said.

Buell said this shows pit bull bans are hard to enforce and that's exactly why other cities are changing laws, like Edwardsville, which just changed its ordinance Monday night, removing the pit bull ban.

"Beefing up their dangerous dog ordinance, make sure the people with dangerous dogs are held accountable, those are the people you want to punish fine," Buell said.

Buell wants KCK to re-examine its ordinance.

"It was hard on the dog and the people involved and a huge waste of tax money and it didn't accomplish anything because it wasn't a vicious dog to begin with," she said.

A KCK spokesman said the pit bull ban is there to protect people. It was only a year and a half ago that a 71-year-old woman was attacked and killed by a pit bull in KCK.

Eco Warriors and Politics

Science and Stuff

Lost Medicaid Funding

To date, the failure to expand Medicaid / TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding.