Comment history

Court reverses man’s vicious dog conviction

So in the state of Ohio, owners of so-called 'pit bulls' can be legally denied due process, but owners of other dogs are entitled to due process. Can someone explain to me how this is legal under our Constitution?

June 24, 2008 at 11:20 a.m. suggest removal

Bill revisits pit bull issue

Rep. Webster is SO right on this issue! The mythical powers of the 'pit bull' has been spread by media. Those who want to get a dog to make it mean and dangerous will naturally gravitate to them and make them so. The 'pit bull' is actually a category of dog breeds, as 'retriever', 'spaniel', and 'setters' are also categories. They can include a widely varying number of separate breeds, or anything that even resembles these breeds (including dogs that have no pit bull inthem but resemble them). The number of bites, when a 'category' is used, is naturally higher than compared to any one breed. The statistics are meaningless. The designation as vicious dogs is totally unwarranted, as evidenced by the enormous number of these dogs in the United States that are stable, friendly, family dogs. If these dogs were vicious, there would be hundreds of deadly attacks reported per day. It just isn't so. I am all for making owners responsible for the actions of their dogs. Dogs don't know laws, they only know what they are or are not permitted to do, via trainingm owner control, and setting of rules and boundaries. It is time to stop making a set of responsible dog owners into criminals, and putting heavy financial burdens and restrictions on them. It is time to require all dog owners to be responsible, regardless of the breed.

January 12, 2008 at 2:19 p.m. suggest removal