HB 18-27: PITBULL Act (Failed)

[Esteemed Jimmy]

Protecting Innocent Tame Breeds from Unjust Laws and Liabilities Act

HOUSE BILL

Be it enacted by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia in Congress assembled,

SECTION I: NAME

1. This bill may be cited as the Protecting Innocent Tame Breeds from Unjust Laws and Liabilities Act, or alternatively, the PITBULL Act.

SECTION II: SUBSTANCE

1. All statutes and regulations which currently place additional legal restrictions, duties, penalties, or legal presumptions upon the keeper, owner or harborer of dogs based solely upon the breed of said dog, including but not limited to the breeds of dogs known as pit bulls, Rottweilers, Doberman pinschers, and Staffordshire terriers are hereby repealed.

2. Nothing in this act shall be construed to remove legal restrictions, duties, penalties, or legal presumptions upon the keeper, owner or harborer of any dog based on prior misconduct of that particular dog or owner.

Passed in the House of Representatives 6-1-0-2

Sponsor: MB
House Designation: HR 18-27

[Esteemed Jimmy]

HB 18-27 is now on the House floor. Debate on this legislation has begun and shall last for no less than 72 hours.

[Esteemed Jimmy]

I don't support this bill; these statutes and regulations are necessary to protect people's safety.

[fhtagn]

While for the most part I support this, there are legitimate concerns regarding wolf-dog hybrids that would make me feel uncomfortable supporting the bill in it's current state.

Even mid to low content wolfdogs exhibit wild animal behavior that makes them unsafe for the average pet owner. High content absolutely should be heavily regulated.

Another concern with wolfdogs is that the rabies vaccine isn't licensed for use in wolfdogs and the efficacy of the vaccine used in in wolfdogs is currently unknown.

[fhtagn]

I don't support this bill; these statutes and regulations are necessary to protect people's safety.

Please elaborate. What breed specific policies exist that cannot be better regulated with breed neutral policies that hold irresponsible owners more accountable for their dogs, regardless of breed?

[Dr. MB]

While for the most part I support this, there are legitimate concerns regarding wolf-dog hybrids that would make me feel uncomfortable supporting the bill in it's current state.

Even mid to low content wolfdogs exhibit wild animal behavior that makes them unsafe for the average pet owner. High content absolutely should be heavily regulated.

Another concern with wolfdogs is that the rabies vaccine isn't licensed for use in wolfdogs and the efficacy of the vaccine used in in wolfdogs is currently unknown.

Good points. I'd be open to removing those parts.

[fhtagn]

Offering an amendment

Protecting Innocent Tame Breeds from Unjust Laws and Liabilities Act

HOUSE BILL

Be it enacted by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia in Congress assembled,

SECTION I: NAME

1. This bill may be cited as the Protecting Innocent Tame Breeds from Unjust Laws and Liabilities Act, or alternatively, the PITBULL Act.

SECTION II: SUBSTANCE

1. All statutes and regulations which currently place additional legal restrictions, duties, penalties, or legal presumptions upon the keeper, owner or harborer of dogs based solely upon the breed of said dog, including but not limited to the breeds of dogs known as pit bulls, Rottweilers, Doberman pinschers, and Staffordshire terriers, as well as hybrids of wolves and dogs, are hereby repealed.

2. Nothing in this act shall be construed to remove legal restrictions, duties, penalties, or legal presumptions upon the keeper, owner or harborer of any dog or wolf-dog hybrid based on prior misconduct of that particular dog or owner.

[Esteemed Jimmy]

Offering an amendment

Protecting Innocent Tame Breeds from Unjust Laws and Liabilities Act

HOUSE BILL

Be it enacted by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia in Congress assembled,

SECTION I: NAME

1. This bill may be cited as the Protecting Innocent Tame Breeds from Unjust Laws and Liabilities Act, or alternatively, the PITBULL Act.

SECTION II: SUBSTANCE

1. All statutes and regulations which currently place additional legal restrictions, duties, penalties, or legal presumptions upon the keeper, owner or harborer of dogs based solely upon the breed of said dog, including but not limited to the breeds of dogs known as pit bulls, Rottweilers, Doberman pinschers, and Staffordshire terriers, as well as hybrids of wolves and dogs, are hereby repealed.

2. Nothing in this act shall be construed to remove legal restrictions, duties, penalties, or legal presumptions upon the keeper, owner or harborer of any dog or wolf-dog hybrid based on prior misconduct of that particular dog or owner.

Representatives have 24 hours for objections.

[Coastal Elitist]

Seems ok. I didn't realize that there were different laws regarding certain dog breeds. Can someone expand on what those are?

[fhtagn]

Seems ok. I didn't realize that there were different laws regarding certain dog breeds. Can someone expand on what those are?

Many localities have enacted "dangerous dog" laws based solely on the breed of dog. Most common breeds targeted nowadays are "pit bulls" and "Staffordshire terriers" (I can expand on why I am using quotes later).

The dog could have no bite history whatsoever and never once shown aggression towards humans or other animals, but many owners will find themselves having to relocate due to their dog being banned in a particular area, or be forced to abide by very strict guidelines that other dog owners do not have to follow. In places where these bans take place, any dogs located in shelters/rescues must be disposed of (either transferred outside of the area or euthanized). They may not be adopted out. If anything happens to a law abiding owner of one of these dogs, they cannot transfer ownership of the dog to a friend of family member. So for example if the owner dies or is in a position where they are unable to care for the dog, many places would require the dog to be euthanized.

[fhtagn]

So is Jimmy going to bother providing anything to back his claim that BSL is necessary?

Or is he just going to ignorantly parrot a talking point like it's a fact?

[Esteemed Jimmy]

So is Jimmy going to bother providing anything to back his claim that BSL is necessary?

Or is he just going to ignorantly parrot a talking point like it's a fact?

Those breeds are statistically more responsible for dog attacks, particularly ones that result in serious injuries or death.

[Mr. Reactionary]

So is Jimmy going to bother providing anything to back his claim that BSL is necessary?

Or is he just going to ignorantly parrot a talking point like it's a fact?

Those breeds are statistically more responsible for dog attacks, particularly ones that result in serious injuries or death.

Fun fact

If we swap out "breeds" and "dog" with 2 other nouns that becomes a Matthew answer.

[Coastal Elitist]

Yeah I think that all dogs should be treated equally. People shouldn't be forced to move based on what breed of dog they have.

[fhtagn]

So is Jimmy going to bother providing anything to back his claim that BSL is necessary?

Or is he just going to ignorantly parrot a talking point like it's a fact?

Those breeds are statistically more responsible for dog attacks, particularly ones that result in serious injuries or death.

Care to provide a source?

You also do realize that most of the dogs that fall under the term "pit bull" aren't actually the American Pit Bull Terrier, correct?

The majority of the dogs responsible for human attacks are actually mislabeled, mixed breed dogs. Dogs with so many different characteristics that it is impossible to judge based on appearance (which is how BSL is enforced) whether or not a dog is dangerous or what breeds it contains in the mix.


American Pit Bull Terriers (fun fact, the only breed with "pit bull" in it's name) was never bred to be aggressive towards humans. In fact, both UKC and ADBA breed standard dictates this breed is characteristically friendly towards humans, even strangers.

https://www.ukcdogs.com/american-pit-bull-terrier

Characteristics

The essential characteristics of the American Pit Bull Terrier are strength, confidence, and zest for life. This breed is eager to please and brimming over with enthusiasm. APBTs make excellent family companions and have always been noted for their love of children. Because most APBTs exhibit some level of dog aggression and because of its powerful physique, the APBT requires an owner who will carefully socialize and obedience train the dog. The breed’s natural agility makes it one of the most capable canine climbers so good fencing is a must for this breed. The APBT is not the best choice for a guard dog since they are extremely friendly, even with strangers. Aggressive behavior toward humans is uncharacteristic of the breed and highly undesirable. This breed does very well in performance events because of its high level of intelligence and its willingness to work.

Disqualifications: Viciousness or extreme shyness

Another issue with visual identification:


How many of these dogs would you personally consider a "pit bull" or other breed listed in this current bill that we are trying to remove regulations on?

I expect you to actually answer this, by the way.

[tmthforu94]

Assuming fhtagn's amendment is adopted, this bill has my full and total support. Fhtagn has significant expertise in regards to dogs and specifically breed temperaments and pre-dispositions. We have had many conversations on this and the past and it is tragic that so many municipalities have restrictions in RL. I applaud MB for introducing this bill and hope to sign it soon!

[Devout Centrist]

So is Jimmy going to bother providing anything to back his claim that BSL is necessary?

Or is he just going to ignorantly parrot a talking point like it's a fact?

Those breeds are statistically more responsible for dog attacks, particularly ones that result in serious injuries or death.

Fun fact

If we swap out "breeds" and "dog" with 2 other nouns that becomes a Matthew answer.

If we swap out Reactionary for Nazi, that becomes a Matthew username

[ON Progressive]

I will support this bill if/when it gets into the Senate.

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Good bill

[Mr. Reactionary]

So is Jimmy going to bother providing anything to back his claim that BSL is necessary?

Or is he just going to ignorantly parrot a talking point like it's a fact?

Those breeds are statistically more responsible for dog attacks, particularly ones that result in serious injuries or death.

Fun fact

If we swap out "breeds" and "dog" with 2 other nouns that becomes a Matthew answer.

If we swap out Reactionary for Nazi, that becomes a Matthew username

Matthew went by the name Mr. Nazi?

[JGibson]

This bill, in its revised form, will have my support.

[Deep Dixieland Senator, Muad'dib (OSR MSR)]

Is this actually federal issue?
Surely this is best left to the regions.

So is Jimmy going to bother providing anything to back his claim that BSL is necessary?

Or is he just going to ignorantly parrot a talking point like it's a fact?

Those breeds are statistically more responsible for dog attacks, particularly ones that result in serious injuries or death.

Fun fact

If we swap out "breeds" and "dog" with 2 other nouns that becomes a Matthew answer.

If we swap out Reactionary for Nazi, that becomes a Matthew username

If we swap out "centrist" for "fool" it becomes Matthew

[fhtagn]

Is this actually federal issue?
Surely this is best left to the regions.

Article III, Section 6 of the Constitution:

13. to make laws necessary for the enforcement of the Constitution and federal law;

The problem with BSL is that many of these laws do not offer necessary legal protections for those with service animals as outlined under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which is adopted into Atlasia as it was a RL law passed in 1990. The ADA does not place any restrictions on what breed someone may use as a service animal, and BSL would severely restrict their access rights and place an unnecessary burden on those with disabilities.

This bill would ensure that Atlasia remains compliant with ADA guidelines, and does make it a federal issue.

[Goldwater]

I know that Labor is already the anti-alcohol party, do they really want to become the anti-dog party as well?

[Dr. MB]

I know that Labor is already the anti-alcohol party, do they really want to become the anti-dog party as well?

You should take a look at a couple of the bills I've sponsored.