So... yesterday I was watching Oprah... I know, I know. I hate to even
admit I still catch her show if I have absolutely nothing else to do at that
particular time.
Hat tip to Janet C. She posted a transcript of a
portion of the conversation so I decided to throw up a post about it. (no pun
intended)
Justin Timberlake was on the show. Every Friday the Oprah show
does a panel discussion and Justin was a guest on the panel. Somehow the
wanker panel discussion came around to dogs.. they asked Justin "whatcha got?"
A picture of his dogs came up in the background.
Here is the transcript from that segment of the
show:
Oprah "I hear you love dogs? What
do you have? What are their names? (background Allie and others are asking
the same thing- they all talk on top of each other at times)
JT "my
babies names are" and he says this in a cutesy voice
Monitor shows the
pic of the 2 boxers and the mix..
Oprah says "you have real
dogs!"
JT - "In the back is Buckley & Brennan - brother and
sister"
Allie - "and you have a Pit Bull"
JT - Yah a Pit Bull/ lab
- ( couldn't quite make out this part but what I heard him say was - "she's
my Tina"
Allie "and she's sweet" sort of questioning
Gayle - "I'm
sacred of Pit Bulls"
JT - "no no"
Gayle -
"I've heard too many stories where they turn - you have no fear what so ever?
I've always been afraid just based on what I've read"
JT -
"no"
Gayle - "you have no fear of them?"
JT - "no
she is really sweet."
Then they went to another topic.
I know, I
know.. why bother mentioning this conversation? Because I am sick to death of the ill informed yapping on about what they hear and read in the news. Taking the
source at face value. (Which I might add is the same source that spews how much
weight Oprah or Gaylemay have
gained.)
I have lost
all respect for Oprah and her BFF Gayle. This
was the sprinkle on the icing on the cake. Oprah's schmoozing around with that
barnacle of a human HSUS Wayne was enough to make me ill but this Gayle
comment took the cake.
Here
are 4 great points/comments from
Janet;
Gayle King
besides being Oprah's BFF is the editor at large
for O magazine. Gayle needs to be educated and clearly Oprah should
of said something to defend the breed considering she had Caesar Milan on to
work with her dog Sophie (the black Cocker who was dog reactive) and brought a
bunch of his dogs to work with her - Oprah almost PLUTZED when she saw
Justin's "pitbull" but then relaxed when
she saw they were very social andcontrolled.
I feel it was disrespectful of Gayle to harp at
Justin, and clearly he was
uncomfortable, when she questioned if he
was worried. It is as though she was
suggesting he should be worried and question his
choice of dog.
Further - HARPO is the
owner/ sponsor of Rachel Ray's show and she owns a "pitbull".
Gayle's
reaction is like canine racial profiling - ergo one Black male sells crack = all
Black males are crack dealers.
Feel free to drop O and Gayle a
line. I think they are used to getting mail; on many fronts
lately.
The town of Midland recently amended their dog bylaw. They actually didn't change much other than increasing fines; however they were already on the "no fly" list for dog owners. Looks as though they are choosing to remain on the illogical list and maintain their status in the **ban plus club.
**the ban plus club is a name I have chosen for municipalities that choose to up the price of poker and add other breeds or non-breeds (mutts) to their list of "get out of our town cause we don't want you or your stinkin' dog here!"
Towns and cities actually have the power to choose NOT to enforce the law. They can choose to apply dog bylaws to ALL dog owners regardless of breed (which some Ontario towns have chosen to do). Some cities and towns choose not to enforce this barbaric, hysterical, illogical law. One such city is Ottawa (to learn more click here).
So basically here is a run down of the sections of the Midland dog bylaw that are pertinent to this topic.
TOWN OF MIDLAND
TOWN OF MIDLAND
BY-LAW NO. 98-41
A By-law for the
Licensing and Requiring the Registration of Dogs and for the Control of Dogs
within the boundaries of the Town of Midland
18.0 MUZZLING OF
DOGS
18.1 The owner of a breed of dog described in
Schedule “A” attached hereto and forming part of this by-law, shall ensure that
when the dog is on any municipal property, the snout of the dog is secured at
all times by the use of a muzzle so as to prevent it from biting a person or
animal and that the dog be secured to the owner by a leash.
SCHEDULE ‘A’ TO
AMENDING BY-LAW 99-64
Pit Bull Terrier,
American Pit Bull Terrier, Pit Bull, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American
Staffordshire Terrier, or any dog of mixed breeding which includes any of the
aforementioned breeds.
Rottweiler or any dog of
mixed breeding which includes the aforementioned breed.
Any member of the
Mastiff dog family or any dog of mixed breeding which includes the
aforementioned breed. (Amending By-law 2001-22)
So to break it down, the American Pit Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier and American Staffordshire Terrier are legitimate breeds and are banned under the amendment to DOLA by the Fiberals in 2005. There are so few of any of the three breeds in Ontario, I highly doubt there are any in existence in Midland. There are less than 1500 purebred dogs total (all three breeds combined) in Ontario.
I've been through Midland many times. My mom lives in the next town and I don't stop for anything in Midland since I don't spend money in towns that are anti dog!
The Pit Bull Terrier and Pit Bull do not exist. They are slang terms for a shape or type of dog but can be any short haired cross bred dog of any combination possible commonly known as a "mutt". Labs being one of the most common breeds in Canada are likely a common portion of the composition of these short haired mutts.
The "or any dog of mixed breeding which includes any of the aforementioned breeds", cannot be proven since there is no way to determine (scientificallyor otherwise) the exact composition of breeds for any mutt. However the gotcha is Bryant added reverse onus in DOLA so it is up to the owner of a mutt to prove their dog isn't a "pitbull" if it is identified as such. You cannot prove a negative therefore you cannot prove your dog is not a "pitbull".
Also banned in Midland is the Rottweiler or any dog of
mixed breeding which includes the aforementioned breed. (Therefore Rottweiler's and any other black and tan dog with eyebrows).
And last but not least; Any member of the
Mastiff dog family or any dog of mixed breeding which includes the
aforementioned breed.
Mastiff breeds include: Old English Mastiff Neapolitan Mastiff Cane Corso Great Dane Tibetan Mastiff Bull Mastiff Dogo Argentino Dogue de Bordeaux Tosa Inu Fila Brasileiro South African Boerboel Presa Canario
So what is left? Hairy and small. But then again, I have witnessed some breed identifications that would make your hair curl. In my estimation, I am better off safe than sorry. I actually know for sure my dog is banned in Midland so I will continue to NOT visit or spend any money there. I will save my money for Elmvale or Penetanguishene. (Ontario local humor check the map). Take a long hard look at your dog before entering the town limits of Midland Ontario. If you are sitting in denial or think your dog's life is safe in this anti dog town, think again.
Côte St. Luc city council has given second reading to a proposed new
bylaw that will compel the owners or custodians of "dangerous" dogs to
muzzle them — although it will not specify any particular breed of dog.
The conclusion to the article is a little confusing; but I will assume the reference is to a previous train of thought.
My advice to Cote St Luc; keep in mind while writing your new dangerous dog bylaw to keep definitions clear and a case by case assessment. Keep in mind there is no such thing as a 'pitbull' even though the dog park crowd asked for a ban on them. Short haired mutts do not make a dangerous dog nor is any dog that "looks" threatening called a 'pitbull'. MSM has given permission to people not in the know to classify any dog that bites or threatens is a 'pitbull'. Just because it is spouted in the media does not make it fact. Just because some other jurisdictions have banned some breeds of dogs does not mean there is justification or just cause present.
My advice for citizens of Anytown Canada; find out proactively what your existing dog bylaws are. Find out if your town council has anything in the works to amend the current bylaw. Educate your council and community before there is a problem. If you have a decent bylaw in place count your blessings.
Our hearts go out to Jennifer Waite, owner of Hershey. I received an email from Jennifer this morning that Hershey passed last night after a brief illness.
Ladies and gentlemen, step right up! Witness the spectacle of the savage, snarling, snapping beast.
Jennifer Waite is sick of the media circus. The rhetoric in the morning
papers and the pronouncements of publicity-seeking politicians just
don’t jibe with her experience of living with a pit bull. Her dog,
‘Hershey,’ couldn’t be further from the stereotype. Says the payroll
clerk, “She just has this warm way about her that makes you relax and
be calm, and smile. You just want to pet her.”
No surprise that a dog owner is quick to defend her pet. Except that
Hershey has the credentials to back up her owner’s claims. You see,
Hershey was a St. John Ambulance-certified therapy dog. She was also
one of a handful of recipients of a Toronto Humane Society award, last
May, honouring community heroes (canine and animal-helping humans).
Hershey's picture was also featured in the article on the Dogs in Canada blog about our "Dollars for Dogs" campaign.
She was quite a girlie. I met Hershey and she was every bit, as described in the articles. She was a model citizen for dogs targeted for their shape in this province. Many people missed out on the benefits of her Saint John's Ambulance Therapy work; since she was forced into early retirement by the McGuinty Liberals in 2005 (when the ban took effect).
I'm having a difficult time containing my excitement. More and more jurisdictions are coming to their senses, albeit court ruling in some instances.
Italy came to their senses. KC Dogblog has a good post about that here.
The Netherlands tossed, UK is on the verge... many towns, cities and counties have already tossed the redneck legislation (stolen reference from caveat) into the trash and many others are on their way.
Miami-Dade is the latest jurisdiction to break out the burning barrel.
Mar 19, 2009 – Miami-Dade County, Florida - Miami Coalition
Against Breed Specific Legislation (MCABSL) and Animal Law Coalition
applaud a court ruling that the Miami Dade County Pit Bull ban is too
vague, and the county cannot enforce the finding by animal control that
a dog is a pit bull that must be euthanized or removed from the
county.
The ruling came in a case challenging the finding by Miami Dade
County Animal Control that a family pet named Apollo was a “pit bull”
that must be removed from the county or euthanized.
**The word euthanized should not be used as a substitution for killing or slaughter. Euthanize is a word used to describe the humane destruction of an animal in pain or suffering. To put out of misery, if you will. Not a word used to describe the senseless slaughter of innocent animals based on the shape or type they are or are similar to.
A court ruled Miami-Dade's 20 year ban on pit bulls was too
vague in defining "pit bull" and unfairly let animal control officers
basically guess whether a dog is a pit bull.
Could it be that the world is coming to its senses? Could it be that the redneck knuckle draggers are being squashed? By the way, here are couple examples of redneck knuckle draggers:
The tide is turning. People have begun to see the grandstanding for what it is. Lies, pure lies. The strong majority of people have cut through the bullsh*t.
The days of witch hunting short haired, muscular looking dogs is coming to an end. Time to retire the pitchforks and torches. Raise a glass to the restoration of common sense and the slap down to all the hysterical hatred. Let dogs be dogs and understand that dogs were never a problem in the first place. There are positive alternatives that are proven winners aka Calgary Responsible Pet Ownership law.
I came across an interesting article written by a physician named Joe Abraham from Louisianna.
Dr.
Abraham points out that something smells fishy in the HSUS camp (my words no
offense to fish). I have been wondering that very thought for quite some time
now. I have jokingly asked whether the animal liberationist "hidden
videos" of many sectors such as research labs, slaughter houses and puppy
mills, are shot in some movie set in Hollywood?
I don't doubt that substandard conditions are alive and well in any given
sector however I do question the hysteria and common occurrence we are being
led to believe. I do not believe there is just cause to threaten an entire
industry such as farming or dog breeding. It is a knee jerk reaction to legislate sweeping laws based on the word of an animal
liberationist group known for "dramatic effect" shall we say. Much research and input must be deliberated when entire industries are threatened. Emotion must not be the driver but rather common sense.
Wednesday night, Nightline airs a story of a Humane Society undercover
videographer, showing "horrific" video of primates at the UL New Iberia
Research Center. The very next morning, the Humane Society announces
that three Congressman are re-introducing a bill to abolish critical
medical research. Is the Humane Society fabricating a story to further
its political agenda?
Picture it … there’s a knock on your door. When you answer, you are
met by a child protective services official announcing they are here to
inspect your home. You ask why, they won’t tell you. When asked for a
warrant, you are told they don’t need one since you have 3 children.
They stroll through your house, tsking over the dishes in the sink to
examine your child’s hands and ears. With a declaration of “Just what
we thought” all your children are gathered up and seized. Why?
“Neglect, nails are too long and uncleaned ears”
It sounds ridiculous doesn’t it? Yet pet owners breeders are being
subjected to this treatment in increasing numbers as a direct
consequence of two factors: ambiguous legislation, often touted as
“Puppy Mill legislation” and the purposeful mis-use of powerful words
such as ‘abuse’ & ’neglect’. The combination of these factors can
be devastating.
All of the above are great articles. Food for thought...
We have had many emails from panic stricken dog owners who are in the Canadian military asking why they cannot get back into Ontariostan with their dog. Well the answer is that if they are posted out of Ontario for longer than 3 months and take their dog with them, they are S-O-L on bringing thier dog back into the province.
The dog must have been licensed in Ontario on or before August 2005. This applies to all registered American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers and "pitbulls" which applies to any dog identified as such by animal control or any other peace officer. I showed a sampling of some of the dogs deemed as banned here in Ontario in another post.
Below are a couple other examples of dogs deemed a "pitbull" since I posted in February. I merely want to give you a true picture of what a "pitbull" looks like in the eyes of many Ontario animal control officers, peace officers and some veterinarians. I actually do not blame those who have been given the ugly job of identifying a cross bred dog (which is impossible to do beyond a doubt). When it is a silly game in a shelter (name that breed) or looking at pictures on the web guessing what breed the dog is; all is fun and games. When an animal control officer, peace officer, vet or shelter worker play this game, it is a game of life or death. If the dog is unlucky enough to have someone identify them as a "pitbull", it is a death sentence. Not so damn fun anymore.
The dogs in the pictures above were identified as "pitbulls" in Ontario. They are littermates.
Getting back to where I place blame for this whole ugly mess...
McGuinty and Bryant orchestrated the whole fiasco but I also place blame firmly in the hands of each and every Fiberal MPP who voted in favor of banning dogs in the province of Ontario.
Overwhelming evidence was presented to them at the committee hearings contrary to the off the rails logic they were applying; yet their whipped vote passed into law the killing of innocent dogs and legislating discrimination against dog owners based on the shape of dog they own.
I realize I was off on a bit of a tangent and will explain how this ties in with my title. The great majority of people I meet and speak to have no clue they are potential targets just owning a dog period. Most people have a picture in their mind of what they suppose a "pitbull" may look like. Those that have been deemed "competent" to be the judge and jury appear to have quite a time narrowing down what it is they feel a "pitbull" may look like.
The term "witch-hunt" is often used to refer to similarly panic-induced searches for perceived wrong-doers other than witches.
So basically, the majority of dog owners look at their dog and think "I'm ok since I do not own a 'pitbull'; the law only applies to those who do own one".
Taking into consideration the reverse onus portion of the law, if your dog is identified as a "pitbull" it is up to you (the owner) to prove it is not. You cannot prove a double negative. Since it is impossible to postively identify the breeds that make up a cross bred dog it is impossible to prove your dog is NOT a "pitbull". That is the Fiberal's game of "GOTCHA".
It is illegal to move out of Ontario ie. military posting, taking your dog out of province for more than 3 months, and then turn around and bring the dog back into Ontario. If you move back within the 3 months you must prove your dog was a resident of Ontario prior to the leaving date.
It is also illegal to travel through or to Ontario as a non resident of the province, with your dog. No holidays or visiting for dog owners in Ontario.
It is illegal to import dogs falling under DOLA into the province. Since the definitions are vague, other than a registered named 3 breeds, any other dog is fair game based on who is id'ing the breed. This rule of thumb applies to any and all situations above.
Two months after Fort Hood officials
banned pit bulls in on-post housing, the U.S. Army standardized its pet
policy, barring pit breeds like American Staffordshire bull terriers
and English Staffordshire bull terriers.
The Army-wide ban also included Rottweilers, Doberman pinschers, chows,
wolf hybrids and any others that display a dominant or aggressive
behavior, according to information from Actus Lend Lease, Fort Hood's
privatized family housing contractor.
The article goes on to state they will be implementing a "grandfathering" and those owning existing animals must register with the Fort Hood Veterinary Clinic prior to enactment in order to qualify for keeping their dog. (One would assume the "or else" factor would be killing your dog?)
The Herald reported in September that
pet owners who registered those breeds with the Fort Hood Veterinary
Clinic before July 10, 2008, were allowed to keep their dogs. Newly
acquired pit bulls and their crosses are prohibited from staying in
on-post housing, according to Fort Hood Regulations 210-48 and 40-5.
"This policy will reduce (the) number of potentially dangerous dogs on
post," Chris Zimmer of the post's Department of Emergency Services said
in September. "It will create a safer environment in Fort Hood housing
areas and will likely reduce (the) number of dog bites on post in the
future."
The miserable failing grade in this line of thinking is that the number of "potentially dangerous dogs" will be reduced. There is absolutely NO proof of any such thing. There is also a huge misconception that the environment will be "safer". Says who? All fun and safe until a breed or cross breed not on the "danger" list takes someone's face off. Then what? add another?
This line of thinking is outright profiling of certain perceived wrong-doers (owners of certain named breeds, determined by the torch/pitchfork crowd) within the US Military. **Refer to definition of witch hunt above**
Some way to thank the men and women of the US Military for risking their lives to save the asses of the torch/pitchfork crowd! I would bet the same crowd are the ones who back the idea there needed to be Military action taken against the "evil doers". It must be a drag to live ones life in such fear...
I live quite close to a military base. There is no evidence that using the same common sense approach of a Responsible Pet Ownership bylaw, just like the one Calgary perfected in the past couple decades, wouldn't work on a military base.
If a dog owner of ANY breed;
trains contains socializes
There should be no reason to deal with a dog owner other than to renew tags once a year.
The same scenario is happening in Onscario. Brave men and women who are deployed to Afghanistan or other countries on peace keeping missions, or simply are posted to other provinces are not allowed back into Onscario with their cross bred dog if the post is longer than 3 months or they aquired a dog while living outside Onscario.
It looks as though you are being targeted and punished by the government if you are in the military and own a dog. Civil rights apply whether you live north or south of the Canada/US border. Either way, the government has no right to come into any citizen's home and dictate what shape/type of dog they can/cannot own!
The town of Vauxhall, Alberta recently updated their canine bylaw. The new dog by-law passed unanimously at the first reading. The new law
would remove the breed specific language and determine dogs “dangerous”
on a case by case basis, and based on the dog’s individual behavior.
Listen up ill informed legislators and torch/pitchfork crowd...
Deputy Mayor Hagen stated in defense of the new by-law;
“There’s been a lot of work that’s gone into this,” said Hagen. “One of
the biggest problems with the old bylaw was not so much the spayed
animals, it was the $1000 licensing for certain animals, and the $1
million liability. Breed-specific bans are outdated.”
Word is spreading and those who truly want to amend laws for the better and implement common sense are taking notice.
I came across a video that made me chuckle. I have attended similar shows to the one shown in the video and have attended many multi breed dog shows. Overall it is rare one would see any aggression between dogs or dogs to humans with any breed. This video made me smile because this is what we have been trying to tell people; but it is the exact opposite to what the main stream media or torch and pitchfork crowd preach. When are people going to grasp that dogs are dogs are dogs...
Well, well, well... Did Toledo finally come to its senses?
Remember Tom Skeldon; one of the Fiberal *star* witnesses for enacting the breed ban here in Ontario? I guess he won't be whoring himself out as a *star* witness anymore?
AS THE recent killing of a Point Place family pet
makes perfectly clear, the first recommendation from the committee
formed to suggest ways to improve the Lucas County dog warden's office
must be a change at the top.
It is time for Tom Skeldon to go.
The Feb. 10 death by tranquilizer dart of Princess, a 10-pound
Pomeranian-beagle mix that had gotten loose from its home, gave the
county's dog warden a chance to show remorse, sympathy, understanding,
and flexibility. Instead, after a cursory "sorry," he dug in his heels
and blindly defended his department's policies.
It is through such policies, particularly a narrowly envisioned crusade
against pit bulls, that Mr. Skeldon has developed a reputation as an
uncaring zealot.
Dog warden Tom Skeldon, the driving force behind Ohio’s BSL, testified before the court in Tellings v. Toledo (2006). Here is a direct illiterate rambling statement from the dog warden himself.
"even if a dog was 50 per cent pit bull, if it did not
‘look like a pit bull,’ the owner would not be charged. On the other
hand, if a dog did ‘look like a pit bull,’ it would be classified as a
pit bull and the owner would be subject to the ‘vicious dog’ laws.”
It takes a while sometimes, but being an evil s.o.b. usually comes back around to bite one in the a**!
Have fun on the unemployment lines Skeldon. I hear the lines are quite long. I think there may some jobs shoveling dog poo. You sound like the type that is better suited to self employment anyway..
