Maryland's Senate Judicial Services Committee voted 7-2 in favor of a bill that would overturn the state's Court of Appeals decision declaring pit bulls "inherently dangerous."
Senators Joseph Getty (R-District 5) and Nancy Jacobs (R- District 34) made up the minority.
Despite more than two hours of testimony before the committee, Senate Bill 2 passed without amendment.
The legislation would overturn the breed distinction created by April's Tracey v. Solesky ruling, which stated that "when an attack involves pit bulls, it is no longer necessary to prove that the particular pit bull or pit bulls are dangerous."
Instead, the bill's language tightens down regulations on all dog owners by making them legally responsible for a first bite even if a pet has never been violent. But Senate Bill 2 loosens the requirements for landlords by removing the strict liability they have faced since the court's decision.
Sen. Robert Zirkin (D-District 11) tried to offer an amendment that would make landlords liable for bites that happen on their properties if they did not require renters to purchase insurance for their animals, but he ended up being the only vote in support of it.
Several members supported Zirkin's amendment in theory, but said it was too late in the game and there was too little time during special session to debate the pros and cons of requiring dog owners to purchase insurance.
"This has got to go to the House," Sen. Victor Ramirez (D-District 47) said. "We've all dealt with the House for years, it's a nightmare to get anything done."
The House Judicary Committee will take up the bill Friday at 1:30 p.m.
Correction: This article originally included Sen. Norman Stone (D-District 6) in the minority when he voted in favor of Senate Bill 2. Patch regrets the error.
Look at the percentages of people who commit violent crimes. I guess maybe we should lock up all the men, Karl? Are you for that? You shouldn't care why, only that men are FAR more likely to be violent than women. This is where the insanity leads when people view everything through group labels rather than individual actions.
Right. Because the state knows everything, including how to ensure people behave well, so long as they apply for a permit. The answer to this, like most issues, is NOT new law. The answer is for PEOPLE WHO DON'T APPROVE OF BAD BREEDERS to STOP buying from those breeders. Want a dog? Go adopt from a shelter. Breeders only exist because there is demand. Kill the demand by way of the willing actions of free people, not by force of guns. Permitting will only raise the cost of dogs bought from bad-breeders and good ones alike, it will not get rid of the bad-breeder problem.
Dogs are not "wild animals" at all. They are distinctly different, and contrary to common belief. It's not easy to know this, but the studies I have seen have been very clear on this. Dogs are domesticated, and yes, dogs come from wolves. But you can't take wolves and domesticate them. You can only domesticate a TINY subset (less than 5%, a good bit less as I recall) of wolves that are genetically different from the rest. To create dogs from wolves you must find a small subset of "broken" wolves that don't grow up, retaining their wolf pup behavior and instinct thoughout their adult lives. Dogs are the genetic decendants of these rare, perpetual wolf puppies. No amount of training of a normal wolf will EVER produce a dog. The studies on this are fascinating if you ever get the chance to scope them out.
Nearly all homicides are committed by people. I don't think we should roll the dice. They can be very dangerous and unpredictable. This is where the insanity leads folks, when you treat individuals with the clumsiness of group labels and statistics but still with all the lethal force of law..
YES, YES, 1000-times YES!! You nailed it. Kevin Dunne, the lawyer comes right out and says it in his letter to the editor. His primary concern is that the damages might go unpaid. He doesn't care WHO pays, just that SOMEONE pays. He'd be happy if somebody on Easter Island was forced to pay, so long as the victim got compensated. This is the CREATION of a new victim, and it is FINE with him.
I think you are thinking well. However, certification and registration have nothing to do with it. Some faceless bureacrat won't know how to assess or guide people to care for a dog. However, if the law stayed completely out of the whole business, in the long run, a private insurance market would get it right, as I think you correctly allude in your post. The private market would get the actuarial risk right, free from the lawmakers. There is no magical truth in votes, just tyranny of the majority. (Just ask Galileo.)
If you chose to have a dog, especially a “dominate “breed. It boils down to owner responsibly- socialize, train and purchase from a respectable breeder not some back yard breeder. Yes they are part of the family and you love them. Just remember they are dogs not your “child’.
I will call my dog a BULLY, I will let my dog BULLY you/ your pets and I will blame you if my BULLY maims or kills you. I will call you a 'drama queen" if you complain about your child spending 17 days in the hospital. I will laugh at your little dog's dead body when my BULLY plays too hard! After all, your dog probably "dissed" my dog, so he had to kill your dog in your yard. Hey, if you don't want your dog to be killed inside your yard or inside your house, don't have a dog! I am a pit monger. I will permit a million pits too many to be born (pit suffering is fine with me too) but I will fit tooth and nail when one pit bull makes the news and is in danger. You see, I love fights! Communication? Problem solving? Not so much. I will say antisocial things and get away with it. See how easily I say, "my pit may not start the fight but she will finish it." I would love to follow all those who cut me off in traffic and kill them in their driveway, but I would be punished for that. So instead, I acquire THE best dog for killing other dogs and then treat my dog like a normal dog, let it kill.. I am a pit monger. so I will pretend to be upset by dog fighing, but I will secretly think "pits do look magnificent when fighting". I even posted that once, but the anti-dog-killers called me out for that, so I won't post that again. signed: the pit monger
Tragically pit mongers do not care about pit welfare. They tell use every time they post that they only care about themselves, their egos, their ability to breed and own pits. The disproportionate suffering and deaths both caused by and suffered by pits is perfectly acceptable to them. This cannot be stressed enough. They care only about themselves. You will notice they do not offer any solutions. Most pits are not spayed/neutered. That's because pit welfare is not of importance to most pit owners, since their pits are weapons, objects for power and aggression. Our suggestion for Mandatory spay/neuter is rejected by pit mongers. The result: pits breeding and dying like flies. They fill our pounds and die by the ton, from coast to coast. You will find this is all perfectly acceptable to the pit mongers.
However, read the test. No where does it say that it is a prediction of safety. It was created to weed out dogs not brave enough for police work. The test doesn't have any child, for example, one wheeling by in a stroller. It doesn't include a elderly dog, like one, sleeping nearby on a lawn chair. No elderly woman walking to the mailbox is part of the test. Too bad, because all these examples of vicitms of pits doing exactly what they were created to do: attack and do damage. The child was pulled from the stroller and essentially "scalped". Both the sleeping dog and the elderly woman were killed. Oh, the test does have weird wire on the ground for the dog to walk over, and an umbrella! Wow! The part that is the most telling, a part that many dogs I know and love would fail, is #4. A starter pistol is suddenly fired behind the dog, 3 x. Dogs that panic and fail to recover quickly, fail the test. This part tells a thinking person, that if a pit is attacking, and you have a gun, warning shots won't stop 84-90% of the pits, so you will have to shoot to kill. And actually, that's what happens too. Every year, more pits/pit mixes are killed by neighbors or police, trying to stop the pit's attack to save the victim, ,than pass this misleading test!
liveleak.com "2 pit bulls attack smaller dog" Excellent video. Should be required viewing of all pit owners, shown at every pit bull awareness daze, every BULLY adoptathon. I never blame the dog. I do blame the breeders, the dog fighters, the pit mongers,who cause the infestation of these tragically handicapped mutants in our communites and cause their deaths by the TON in pounds. You cannot adopt your way out of killing pits, as long as 8 litters of pits a week are being produced in your community! its are different. Proof is that,with countless combinations available, pits are the choice of essentially ALL US dog fighters. Pits are victims of these man-made handicapps. Stop making more victims. Ban pit breeding now.
The tugging is the instinct. Check out youtube.com "bullseye hang time" All four paws off the ground, and still tugging more. Imagine that dog tugging on your breast, or testicles? Your child's jaw? Your elderly mother's thigh? The comment says it all. One pit monger happily writes; "True apbt god couldn't even created. It took men." I do agree, God had nothing to do with these extreme mauling, tugging, crushing instincts of the pits. Cruel humans caused their existance. That is not sufficient reason to continue making more of them. Enact and Enforce Mandatory spay/neuter microchipping of all pits, pit mixes.
I'm glad you never had a problem with your pit harming anyone you knew. But you couldn't keep her safe/at home. What happened to her? Did she get trained to fight, was she abused? I do agree that there should be insurance for all dogs. However, as other things, how would it be enforced? I have insurance for my dog, even tho she is a non pit. I recommend mandatory spay/neuter microchipping. Any lost dog would be MSNM before return. Any dogs suspected of being fought would get MSNM. Immediately there would be fewer attacks, fewer puppies being born. It would be more difficult to sell pit puppies if breeding was illegal. Everyone sane and compassionate wins.
Did you know that the UKC, says "form AND function". Dogs must have proper conformation, but also perform the "job" of their breed to be declared a Champion.. Setters had to show they could hunt birds by winnig field dog trials, coonhounds had to hunt coons and win. Pit bulls, did they have to win "nanny dog" contests? Nope, since that nickname wasn't created until the 1980's. No, in order to have your pit bull become a Champoin it had to win three dog fights, ones where a UKC referee was present and reported the results to the UKC. Pits were created to kill other dogs. That is their history and their instinct. That is their handicap too. When the instinct to tug and shred sparks in the pit bull mind and a sleeping neighbor dog is avalable, a "good" pit will kill. If no dog is available, a dog-sized human may dog (child). Stop making more handicapped, sometimes deadly dogs.
First, the reason you "see" mostly pit bulls in shelters is because "pit bull type dogs" are actually a mix of up to 10 different breeds. DNA tests have proven that in 80% dogs visually identified as "pit bulls", there is no breed commonality whatsoever. The CDC and the American Veterinary Medical Association both concluded that breed is not a factor in dog aggression in a 10-year study of dog bites. There are no statistics that prove "pit bulls" bite more often. If you read dog bite reports, they list "pit bull type dogs", which includes up to 10 different breeds and mixes (American Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Bulldogs, Bullmastiffs, and several others that often include Boxers and Huskies). This demographic makes up almost 50% of the U.S. dog population (although, as the CDC points out, a precise number is impossible to quantify because of the subjective nature the definition of "pit bull" because a "pit bull" is really just a mixed breed, short-haired dog), and they are responsible for between 20 ad 30% of dog bites. Break that down, and they have a pretty low occurrence of dog aggression.
Unfortunately, most people don't give much thought to what harm comes from buying a dog from an irresponsible breeder. Dogs are treated HORRIFICALLY when used for breeding. And rampant and irresponsible breeding is why our shelters are full. NO MORE BACKYARD BREEDING! If you are a responsible breeder, and you get a license, and you run a responsible facility, then FINE. But this attitude that you can make enough money for a vacation off of your dog's puppies is sickening.
1. There are a HUGE number of dogs that can identified as pit bull in the U.S. Up to 40-60% of the 88 million dogs in this country, by many estimates. That's a minimum of 35 million dogs. There are back yard breeders all over this state who are trying to make a buck by breeding their "pit bull" with their neighbor's "pit bull" and selling the puppies for $100 a piece. It is a RAMPANT problem that needs to STOP. It is a reflection of this irresponsible behavior, not of the nature of any breed of dog. 2. "Pit bull" is not a breed. Some dogs visually identified as "pit bull" DNA test as a boxer/bulldog mix. Others may DNA test as a bullmastiff/bull terrier mix. A "pit bull" is a mutt of up to 10 different breeds, and is only identifiable by subject visual assessment. 3. Because of the sheer number of dogs that can be identified as "pit bull", there is a relative number of aggression incidents related to the number of dogs. Although the CDC stated clearly that a baseline is impossible to reach (because of the subjective nature of identification AND because this makes it impossible to quantify the number "pit bull" type dogs), it is impossible to track. But it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that 40% of all dogs = 40% of dog-related incidents.
I guess us "pit bull people" are too smart, happy, successful, and well-adjusted is too much for Karl to take.
Or do you? "Pit bull" is NOT an AKC-registered breed, therefore there is no "pit bull" category at Westminster. Staffordshire Bull Terriers (which are, in fact, the dog referred to as the "nanny dog" and has been since the 19th century in England) has won Westminster, but SBTs are NOT pit bulls. I have an AKC-registered Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and I have 2 rescued "pit bulls". Good job on the copy and paste from the UKC website, though.
Umm, yes see gun control in MD, an AR is regulated because it looks mean.