On Oct. 13, 2014, the town of Moreauville, a small and sleepy community of less than 1,000 people located in the heart of Avoyelles Parish, enacted one of the most draconian and arbitrary ordinances against so-called “vicious dogs” in the entire country. If the town follows through on its promise, as it’s indicated, it will confiscate each and every rottweiler and pitbull living in family homes, and unless the family suddenly finds others to adopt those dogs in other cities, Moreauville will kill those family dogs within thirty days.

Perhaps not surprisingly, a petition opposing Moreauville’s ordinance, which is almost assuredly unconstitutional, has already attracted 70,000 signatures, and yesterday, CNN broke the story on both its national and international news websites. Indeed, people from all over the country and the world are outraged by Moreauville’s decision to confiscate and kill these family pets, regardless of the animal’s disposition, intelligence, and affection, and regardless of the service those dogs may provide to their physically and mentally challenged owners. One of those dogs scheduled to die is Zeus. Brooke Buford of the local NBC News affiliate reports (bold mine):

O’Hara Owens is trying to spend as much time as she can with her beloved pit bull, Zeus, before the village she lives in promises to take him away from her and dispose of him on December 1.

“If anything ever happened to him, I would just shut down,” she said.

O’Hara suffers from severe neck problems and has been forced to wear a halo brace and use a wheelchair.  

She says Zeus acts as a sort of “therapy dog,” providing love and support for her and her other brothers and sisters.

“I can sit here if I’m in pain, he comes and he notices it before I even make any noise,” she said.

But, Zeus has been blacklisted as a “vicious” breed in Moreauville.

Zeus, by all accounts, has a spotless record. He’s considered “vicious” merely because of his breed.

Zeus's owner holding up the demand letter she received from Moreauville.
Zeus’s owner holding up the demand letter she received from Moreauville.

The letter reads:




Again, it’s worth noting that no one had ever complained about Zeus. In fact, there isn’t a single documented dog bite case in the entire town. Quoting again from Brooke Buford’s report on KALB (bold mine):

Alderman Penn Lemoine said the ordinance was created to appease several residents.

“We had several residents that were complaining about not being able to walk along the neighborhoods because these dogs were basically running along town,” Lemoine said in a phone interview.

We asked Lemoine about dog attacks…

“There have been, but I don’t think they’re documented,” he said.

And, if they plan to kill the dogs they collect on December 1…

“I’d rather not elaborate on that,” he said.

“Is that what it is? Are you going to kill the dogs?” asked reporter, Brooke Buford.

If that’s what the ordinance says, then that’s what it says,” Lemoine responded.

Lemoine told us he owns a German Shepard. But, he only considers pit bulls and Rottweilers as “vicious.”

He also says what the town is doing is completely legal.

It is worth noting that according to the CDC, German Shepards are considered the third most vicious breed in the world, though rankings like these have recently come under growing and intense scrutiny by animal rights activists, veterinarians, and scholars. Quoting the National Canine Research Council (bold mine):

There is no evidence from the controlled study of dog bites that one kind of dog is more likely to bite a human being than another kind of dog. A recent AVMA survey covering 40 years and two continents concluded that no group of dogs should be considered disproportionately dangerous. Additionally, in a recent multifactorial study published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association on the exceptionally rare events of dog bite-related fatalities, the researchers identified a striking co-occurrence of multiple, controllable factors in these cases. Breed was not identified as a factor.

For dog owners like myself, dogs can become a part of your family. But, of course, for the purposes of the law, we treat dogs as property. Still, the right to property is fundamental in our Constitution, and laws that deprive citizens of their own property cannot be arbitrary or capricious. You can’t simply confiscate and kill someone’s dog without affording them due process and a hearing, and Moreauville’s ordinance effectively denies that opportunity. This just doesn’t pass muster:

Screen Shot 2014-11-23 at 5.22.21 AM

After all, why isn’t Alderman Lemoine’s German Shepard also irrefutably presumed to be dangerous? 

Update: Earlier today, in a statement posted on Facebook, The Veterinary Clinics of Avoyelles Parish announced that they will not comply with Moreauville’s ordinance.


94 thoughts

  1. Well, now, silly law student. There’s obviously no need for a hearing where there is an “irrefutable presumption”.

    One would think that they already have a leash law. Enforce it.

    1. I agree! enforce the leash laws already on the books instead of punishing the innocent. As for Zues, I’d suggest docking his tail and call him a boxer.

      1. The town is so small that they probably don’t have a police force or an animal control officer. What they have is a handle full of alderman passing laws about matters they know nothing about without any regard to the rights of the citizens or the consequences for them.

      1. that is what i just wrote my legislation professor about!!!! what they are really saying is, ‘we declare that these breeds are hereby considered dangerous…’, which really prompts the question, on what basis? the weird language is obviously to avoid answering that question.

        so here’s our assignment as law students: on what basis to challenge? have you taken a local government class? do you know any law students or a student animal legal defense fund chapter in LA? is someone challenging this in court right now???

        i’m thinking due process, fundamental right to property, therefore rational basis, and no legitimate interest – they admit NO documented cases!!!!! TRO tomorrow – this is the definition of irreversible harm.

        1. There are hundreds of pit bull bans in the United States. Many of them don’t include grandfather clauses and I don’t know of any that have been found unconstitutional. Denver’s was overturned by a state law banning breed specific legislation but then reinstated by a court based on the city’s home rule status. Here in Canada the Ontario Court of Appeal actually ruled that a rational basis wasn’t necessary to pass a law involving public safety. There only needed to be an apprehension of a risk to public safety which the court felt was raised by media reports of pit bull attacks, notwithstanding that these reports have been conclusively found to be wrong. This is what you will be up against. The judges themselves are often biased against pit bulls and will twist the law anyway they have to to uphold a ban.

  2. This is ridiculous and it reeks. I am a small, middle aged woman with 3 pits, 1 GSD and 2 others and there have been no vicious incidents PERIOD. All are rescues/strays so I know nothing of their past experiences. All came to me unaltered and were so appreciative of affection that never was a hackle raised. We are a cozy and calm family.

  3. Clearly he states that residents were complaining about dogs that were running loose. WHY NOT ENFORCE YOUR DAMN LEASH LAWS AND PICK UP THE ONES THAT ARE THE PROBLEM

      1. My thoughts exactly Mary. Pick up the dogs, all of them, that are running around being complained about. They need to leave law abiding, responsible owners and their dogs alone.

  4. You cannot judge a dog by their breed. I have had two pit bulls. One was the most loving and kindest dog I have ever been around. She loved my grandson like he was her own and never left his side. That dog’s brother was more protective…..he would bark and carry on if someone he didn’t know tried to come through the gate and into our yard. But he never bit anyone. I grew up with a bull mastiff. He loved our family for over 15 years. The only time he went after anyone was when someone came into our yard (bresking through a locked gate) and tried to get in our house. Our current de bordeau is supposed to be aggresssive (remember this is the same breed as the dog in Turner & Hooch)……he is the sweetest and most loving dog ever and bigger than all our previous dogs. He has never gone after anyone – but I do think he probably would if a stranger tried to harm a member of his family. And what is wrong with that?

      1. You’re misreading the Second Amendment. It does not give you the right to “light up City Hall” merely because you disagree with an ordinance. I decided to publish your comment, because I think it’s important to remind folks to put this into context: The Constitution doesn’t protect your “right” to stage an armed coup against the government.

        1. I disagree. It’s often said that the second amendment stands as a final line of defence for the other rights in the Bill of rights. I didn’t suggest that people light up city hall because they disagree with a policy. This isn’t about a zoning by-law, this is about an egregious abuse of power by politicians sending police into your home to at the least sieze and destroy your property and to many of us to kill a member of our family without any just cause or do process of law. If you don’t think that the second amendment applies to this then I’ll see you in the concentration camp.

          1. I totally understand and empathize with the passion that an issue like this can inspire, and as I mentioned in the original post, I agree completely that this is an egregious abuse. But as awful as a law like this is, there is no need to talk about brandishing weapons and marching down to a tiny town hall in a village in rural Avoyelles Parish just to violently threaten and intimidate three or four alderman. The ordinance they passed was irresponsible, but if you think staging an armed coup is somehow appropriate in this situation- and if you’re serious- I have no problem sharing your e-mail and IP addresses with the authorities. Please, let’s approach this like American citizens, not like vigilantes. If the town actually attempts to enforce this ordinance and begins confiscating dogs, work through the courts in order to get an immediate injunction and, then, with the help and support and resources of the more than 120,000 petitioners, file a lawsuit challenging the law’s constitutionality. You’ll most likely win in court, and in so doing, it will ensure no other city in the state can ever pass the same type of law. To me, that’s a much better solution than an armed coup against a town hall that services less than 1,000 people. My plan seems sensible; yours is psychopathic. Just sayin’.

        2. read the comment to which he was responding! it was to light up the SWITCHBOARDS! that is how i read all of the comments about lighting up city hall. you people are knee-jerk! CALL people, just call!

        3. That would be called Free Speech and yes we have every right to call and protest this travisty. If lose dogs are a problem the have your AC hand out big fines and maybe that will wake them up. Killing innocent dogs is not going to help the situation.

          1. I guess Lamar gave up on this, but just to clarify the point Lamar was trying to make, the 1st amendment pertains to free speech, the 2nd to the right to keep and bear arms. Bryan may also have meant to cite the 1st amendment in his initial comment. If he did mean the 2nd amendment, he was talking about lighting up something other than the switchboard. If not, he wasn’t.

      2. Looks like a clear case of the town ignoring the 4th amendment. I don’t care for the ACLU, but I bet they would love to investigate this unlawfull and unconstitutional act against law abiding citizens.

  5. If someone came on MY property trying to take my family dog, as soon as they stepped foot on MY property they would be missing their knee caps. JS

    1. I also don’t think it is constitutional. Yet, there are such things as civil forfeitures too. Again, that is taking your property, often that involves money, simply because they think you might have gotten it illegally. Cost of getting it back are incurred against the owner. My Rottie died of bone Cancer, but as an old person on oxygen with heart disease, I’d pity the fool that would have tried to take that dog from us if we lived there. A lot of things I’m not, but, a lousy shot isn’t one of them. As for paying a fine, POUND SAND! She was aired in our locked back yard with a high fence all around and was never registered. She had all her shots, but she was off the grid…

      1. A number of people are claiming this law is unconstitutional yet similar laws have been upheld by courts throughout the United States. In this particular case, with this particular dog, the law is in conflict with the Americans with Disabilities Act because it’s a service dog. The authorities are free to sieze and murder the other dogs in town.

        1. Actually, the law is not constitutional. So long as the breed is not illegal in the United States or that state, all existing dogs in an ordinance like that MUST be grandfathered in UNLESS they have a history (recorded history) of biting etc. Therefore, the only dogs that could legally be under fire would be dogs that were brought into the city AFTER the ordinance, as it is unconstitutional for the government to take an individual’s property without just cause or suspicion of illegal activity. Meaning, they can’t just take your dog because they don’t like the breed. They have to look at each case individually and determine without a doubt that the individual dog was a danger to others or harmed others and be able to show evidence (whether recorded or previous documentation) to justify removing it from the property. If a dog that was previously known as a non-threat was deamed as a threat by those law enforcement or the AC, they would have to be able to duplicate the results of the the threat test.

          1. They took them and euthanized them when the enacted BSL in Colorado, none were grandfathered and they got away with it. The dog only had to “look” like a pit bull for them to take the dog. These alderman are doing the same, the owners have proven Zeus IS NOT a pit bull, he’s an American Bulldog mix and they basically said too bad, he looks like a pit bull so he has to go or be euthanized. These people don’t care what the dog’s breed actually is, just what it may be. If you look at the letterhead you’ll see that out of the seven people who are running this village three are related the Mayor, an alderman and the Chief of Police…..hmmm let’s see, nepotism at its finest!! I don’t see how they could pass an ordinance without a vote or at least having a village meeting that includes the citizens. If this council can do whatever the hell they want without having to account to its residents, I sure wouldn’t live there long.

        2. Bryan, Zeus is NOT a certified therapy dog, so the ADA does not apply in this case. O’Hara says Zeus acts as kind of a therapy dog to her because he knows when she’s feeling bad.

          1. There is no such thing as a certified therapy dog under the Ada. Lots of organizations provide certification but that’s not needed. The dog only has to have been trained to assist a person with a disability. Here’s what the department of Justice says you can ask about a service dog: When it is not obvious what service an animal provides, only limited inquiries are allowed. Staff may ask two questions:

            (1) is the dog a service animal required because of a disability, and (2) what work or task has the dog been trained to perform. Staff cannot ask about the person’s disability, require medical documentation, require a special identification card or training documentation for the dog, or ask that the dog demonstrate its ability to perform the work or task.

            The child is clearly disabled and has identified tasks that Zeus performs to assist her. They need to work a bit on the second part but the department of Justice doesn’t permit them to even ask for proof of the training.

    2. Another good use of your second amendment rights. I’m a Canadian but it seems I understand the Bill of Rights better than some of the posters here.

  6. As a veterinarian, this is heart breaking and completely wrong and unacceptable. It is as though certain breeds of dogs are being wrongly judged strictly because some people deem them unsafe. I see hundreds of dogs each week at work and can honestly say no 2 dogs are alike. For each dog that I examine, I assess their personality and demeanor to determine if they are aggressive or scared. I never make a preconceived judgement about any dog as they are all different with different personalities. This can not be legal and something must be done to stop this atrocity.

  7. I signed the petition and went on to say how ignorant, stupid, uneducated the city was and will look to the world….etc.etc.etc, if they actually go through with this. Blood lust and vengeance are spreading across the nation like a virus.

    1. Do you know where I can find the petition to sign it? I have 2 pit bulls myself and have raised them and Rotties my whole life. This sickens me. Im disabled and dont know what i wud do without my boys.

  8. Has anyone set up a fund for lawsuits for the residents? If there’s a local lawyer willing to start filing against the parish on behalf of the residents constitutional rights being violated please let us know. I’m a pittie mommy (along with being a pommie mommy and they are far more vicious than my Baby would even think of being) and I’m willing to donate to a legal fund!

  9. There have been multiple instances of dog attacks and people just fearful of walking in our town due to these animals unless yall live in our parish stfu and stay the hell out of our business

    1. The dogs that are causing the problems should be removed then. Who just decides to remove ALL Pitt Bulls and Rottweilers?? At that rate why not ban dogs all together?? I’ve been bitten once and it was by a small dog. The people running your town and the residents who asked for this sound incredibly ignorant.

    2. To Matthew: Just because you live in the town doesn’t mean that the rest of the country og the rest of the world should turn a blind eye to undemocratic misuse of power. Who do you think you are? If there are dogs running around in your town and attacking people, maybe you need to inforce a leash law ordinance as other towns and cities do.
      Strange that no attacks have been recorded or in the news if the situation is so extreme as you say. By the way, the statement that no attacks have been recorded is by the mayor of your town.

    3. Really ? This is everyone’s business. If this is allowed to happen it will become the norm. The mayor stated no dog attacks recorded ? So what’s the problem ? Fine the irresponsible owners. This sounds like a bunch of swamp people in the vingelaty mode. Spay and neuter your pets and you won’t have a problem with lose dogs.

      1. Oops. Vigilante mode was what I wanted to say. I hope this town comes to it’s senses . Very sad situation .

  10. Matthew many people commenting DO live in Avoyelles Parish. Also this is the most total complete unintelligent thing any town could do. It just blows my mind how foolish some people in that town must be. If a dog is a problem you do something about that dog. You Matthew as well as your few lil friends there are like the liberals that want to take everyone’s guns just because if a few bad apples. There will always be mentally disturbed people and biting dogs. You people may be cut off from information. Idk. But the rest of us know that chiuauaws bite more than any other dog and studies have found that Labrador Retrievers are more vicious than Pitt Bulls and Rottweilers so maybe your little gov’t group should get out a little more often. I realize you will get ugly next but I won’t read it because I’m turning off this post. PS Try buying books, go to libraries and educate yourselves. Have a nice day.

  11. ONE word: DISCRIMINATION. 100%…Do not allow the Moreauville discriminators take your pets away.. If this happens, they will want to kill all your pets. Why don’t the Town Hall enfore the Leash Law instead? TALK ABOUT IGNORANT people.

  12. Well Matthew obviously you live in this parish, maybe you and the stupid people that agree with this should maybe talk to your so called town people and enforce a leash law!!! Not kill people’s pets because of their breed!!! I have a Pitt bull that sleeps in the bed with my husband, myself, and my four year old every night. He wouldn’t hurt a fly, unless you come on my property unwelcome. Then he will protect what is his. I wish somebody would try to come on my land and take my baby. I welcome them to try but they want be leaving with him. They may be leaving but it want be walking away with my dog, they will be pushed away In a black bag on a gurney. This is my house, my dog, and my rights. Any dog can bite, the only attacks reported are Pitt bill attacks because they are so discriminated against. If this actually goes through I would move so far away from that sorry town I would never have to see it again!!!!

  13. Bullshit.straight bullshit..i have two full breed pitbulls that r kike my family n even called my kids.its not the breed its the owner.its all how u raise ur dogs .show them love n raise them with complete control and your animal will b ur most loyal family member..i think i would have to take a stand and fight for my pit no matter what the cost.screw that place , its time as ccitizen’s to stand up n foght back against al this .thats all.later.

  14. Mathew. I live in Very near your town,,, same parish, own a pitbull and have a vested interest in signing the petetion. Its unconstitutional and its also just wrong. They do have lease laws, just lazy, young police officers that cannot or will not do the right thing here.. Sounds like a New mayor is coming to town. It sure is not gonna be you.. It might just be me next and I really don’t like people who drink and drive, which I am sure YOU do.. Can you say DUI?? However I appreciate your comment, it is a great example of how dumn witted your town is, people have rights, unfortunately even you and your poor mayor..

  15. Seriously, Zeus isn’t a pit bull he is an American Bulldog.

    I urge the residents to get a lawyer. Your city won’t win this. And do NOT open the door for them without a warrent. Do not admit you have a pit bull or a mix there of. In the meantime get your dogs out of town.

  16. To the ones who agree with this stupid ordinance, how will you feel when your dog’s breed is next? If they get away with outlawing these 2 breeds, they won’t stop there. Next will be German Shepherds and then Chows and so on til they get rid of all dogs. Then they will go after other pets like your cats, hamsters, snakes, etc. We are American citizens with constitutional rights and as long as you allow the government to take any of them away, they will continue til they take all of them.

  17. This is so bizarre and outside of human common sense (or any kind of sense) that I hope it’s really all a sick hoax by some inbred redneck hillbillies, and it will land on snopes someday. More people attack people than dogs attack people — using the same “logic” why not confiscate and euthanize all the violent citizens with behavior or dom vil complaints against them? Duh.

  18. I am appalled at this story! It really is pure ignorance and paranoia on the city’s part. Any animal has the potential to attack at any given moment. Breeds such as Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, Dobermans, and such are victims of circumstance. Just like humans have different strengths and talents, so do dogs. Some dogs make better guard animals, some better hunting companions, some are better at herding, and so on. Being a small town is no excuse to not handle each complaint individually and deal with THAT animal. What this town is doing to these breeds is no different than what was done to the Blacks or the Jews, labeling an entire race because of the bad decisions of a few or because they have characteristics you don’t understand and fear. This will be like genocide.

    1. There is no national registry for service dogs that is legit. Anyone can register their pet as a service animal. Plus it is a registry, not a certification. Even certification (like all the scam online ones going right now) are not legit. It is the training, not the paper, vest or patches that make a dog a service dog. The dog must be trained to do work or tasks to help its disabled handler. Emotional comfort is not a task or work of an SD. Zeus qualifies as an emotional support pet. Get a letter from the doctor that says why this girl needs her dog with her… how he is medically necessary, What kind of support he provides her. It will take longer than a month to train him to be a service animal. However, this takes care of one dog. There are many other innocent dogs out there at risk. Also note: Denver, CO actually banned even SDs who were Pit bulls, and euthanized them, so the whole service dog thing does not mean they won’t do the same with service dogs who are these breeds. I also agree with another commenter who said Zeus isn’t a Pit Bull, but an American Bulldog. And yes, he could pass as a Boxer.

    2. There is no “national registry” for service dogs. A dog must be trained to perform tasks to mitigate it’s handler’s disability to be considered a service dog and this dog is not a trained service dog. This article is very misleading. Therapy dogs are dogs who visit hospitals and nursing homes to make people feel better. They are not protected by any laws. At most, this dog is an Emotional Support Animal, but that requires doctor documentation and even then, there’s no guarantee that they would allow it as an ESA.

  19. We are to lazy to enforce a leash law… Oh, lets make another law that allows us to storm into people’s houses like the SS and take their property.

  20. I grew up in Cottonport which is a few miles from Moreauville in Avoylles Parish. Would love to help out. Let me know if i can help. Maybe get the dog until things can be ironed out. I have 3 dogs at my house and we take great care of them. We love animals. My sister is also a Veternarian in Seattle. My e-mail is lemoinelj@hotmail.com.

    1. Are you in the same family as the mayor, alderman and the policeman who are responsible for all of this? I seem to remember that Lemoine was their last name too? Just curious…

      1. You’re right half the town officials have the same last name. I wouldn’t be surprised if the rest are related. I think this is what happens when too many people in a town marry their cousins.

  21. Rotties and Pitts are wonderful animals. It is the owners that make them mean or dangerous so the law needs to go against BAD OWNERS not a breed that is a great deal more loving than poodles or chihuahua’s. This action against Pitts and Rotties is just pure FEAR and IGNORANCE. Flood the Governors Office with Protest, Mayor’s Office…even the so called President…Fight for the rights of a Beautiful and highly intelligent breed!

  22. Not all Pitt bulls are Pitts. What about the Am staff or the am bully people label as Pitts? Zeus doesn’t look like a Pitt he looks like a bully (American bull dog). There are vast differences between the breeds. I’m not for this but there are other places in the U.S. where Pitts are banned, one of them being Dade county Fla.
    Ive signed the petition. I suggest others do the same. But sadly by that time it may be too late.

  23. Sounds like P.E.T.A. has written this law. How about everyone that has a dog move out of that town and see what happens – maybe the town would disappear!

  24. Thanks, Lamar, for picking up the gauntlet on this story as well. Please everyone share this story on your Facebook pages and share the link for the petition.
    Breed specific legislation was overturned by a judge recently in another state. There is a precedence, but first we must file a suit to enjoin the city and get an injunction to stop them. We need an attorney to step up and help.

  25. Alarmingly, I think this could be more than a dog issue, although I think this law is insane and obviously illegal because it couldn’t possibly have had public comment because they wouldn’t support this drastic measure. Dark-of-night government acts (no public notice and/or input) are illegal. Challenge this on this basic level and I believe this law won’t stand. I don’t know what started all this, but I can say with confidence that the law treats dogs as property, which means Moreauville is trying to set the very dangerous precedent that it can just seize and destroy private property – clearly violating our rights. Who’s comfortable with this unconstitutional move? Additionally, I do relate to fears about aggressive animals, especially pit bulls, but instead of mass murdering them why not just pass a law that requires these dogs can only be purchased through reliable breeders with heavy fines for those can’t produce pedigree papers; require six-foot fences with proper signage warning visitors; outlaw dog fighting so there’s no economic incentive to inbreed them to make them killers and require these dogs be registered with local government so the owners can be held accountable if they get loose. However, we have a right to protect our property, including the dogs we use to guard it. I also relate to acting immediately about vicious dogs, but you don’t kill them ALL because someone influential or powerful suddenly hates them and abuses the law to destroy these animals. I know pit bulls kill pets and put hundred of stitches in people, but typically the bad one is the owner who don’t want to pay for the damage they cause. Bottom line: Stick to the law. If a dog – any dog – is proven to be vicious (a history, not just one bite) then do what’s necessary to protect the public. Don’t murder the harmless or the law because of one out-of-control situation. My God, what do they do with real situations over there? Nuke the planet?! Get a grip.

  26. Let’s STOP Canine Racial Profiliing, Did you know that there is NO such breed as “pit bull”? There is no breed of dog that is recognized, or registered as “pit bull”. The term used to mean any dog whose owner used it for pit fighting. It has become corrupted into an umbrella for banning numerous pure-bred registered breeds of dogs, and any mixed breed that even remotely resembles them. The American Kennel Club recognizes a breed known as the American Staffordshire Terrier and the United Kennel Club recognizes a breed known as the American Pit Bull Terrier. Neither of these breeds was EVER bred or intended to attack humans. They were used in pit fights against bulls in the 1800s and any dog that bit a handler would have been put down immediately. A dog that bit a human was not considered reliable enough for the pit. This attack training is something that has only come about in the past few decades and is done by bad owners NOT bad dogs. As it now stands there are at least seventy-five recognized breeds of pure-bred dogs that are prohibited from ownership, or restricted from ownership, and any mixed breed of dog that looks like a banned breed of dogs is fair game under these regulatory takings of privately owned animals. That is fully 1/5 all recognized breeds. The United States of America is on the fast track to taking away our most ancient property, animals, and the destruction of one of our most ancient occupations, that of animal husbandry.
    When I was a child growing up every dog attack was attributed to a German Shepherd. In fact there were more dog bites from Labrador Retrievers last year than from “pit bulls” because there are far more Labs than the “alleged pit bulls”. Blaming an entire breed for the stupidity and greed of a few human beings is nothing more than discrimination.
    Many law makers are not animal oriented. Passing or proposing any legislation aimed at specific breeds of canines is very much like human racial profiling. Our laws should identify illegal activities and define the penalties associated with breaches of the law. Domesticated canines are considered personal property and present problems in society only when owned or tossed out by irresponsible people. Our laws should address irresponsible canine ownership and should never refer to specific breeds. Breed specific legislation is an intolerable form of discrimination that has many undesirable far reaching consequences, including economic ones. Breed specific legislation is expensive and difficult to enforce. It impacts people who both live in and visit jurisdictions (ie., tourists); impacts vets, breeders, dog food manufacturers, and, in many cases, canine divisions of various law enforcement agencies. To make matters worse, canine racial profiling (breed specific legislation) is a total waste of time and money, as it will NOT turn irresponsible dog owners into responsible dog owners. Irresponsible canine ownership can only be prevented by addressing the problem directly: define the problem, define the penalty or penalties, and ENFORCE the laws. Most urban jurisdictions have laws on the books now that, if enforced, would eliminate most dog aggression disasters. The dog, regardless of breed, is in violation of leash laws if running loose and the owner should be penalized – end of story. The problem is at the other end of the leash and any laws should be addressed to that end.
    Here is a link to a site with an identify the “pitbull” game – 90% of people INCLUDING dog professionals cannot identify the pitbull

  27. You must be kidding! Wouldn’t the smart thing to do be catching the actual animals that are running in the street? What cruel people you are in Town Hall. Are you elected officials?

  28. How about we, instead, round up and kill the people who breed and train pitfalls and related breeds to be so vicious? They are the ones responsible for such dogs to exist.

    1. You can’t breed a dog to be vicious. There is no “vicious gene”. Dog attacks happen equally among all breeds. Fortunately serious attacks are exceedingly rare. Pit bulls are wonderful loving dogs. As with any dog breed it takes an owner to produce a dogecoin that will attack people. That is why the best laws are directed against the owners, not the dogs. Even a badly abused dog can become friendly and sociable when given against good home.

  29. HUGE QUESTION!! Why is it that NO ONE has mentioned doing the OBVIOUS?! Forget about slaying innocents and destroying families and try, instead, using that money to set up free spay/neuter clinics and dog (owner) training classes!! WTH people? Solve this issue with PREVENTION!! When we end the sad problem of homeless pets, irresponsible backyard breeding and ignorant owners the issue of dogs, of ANY breed, running free on the streets DISAPPEARS! Yes. It takes some time, but the outcome is by far more humane, responsible and CONSTITUTIONAL! In the meantime, collect the strays and have them fixed, behavior modified, trained and rehomed. Simple. Effective. And just the RIGHT way to go!
    P.S. Once we allow government etc to take our dogs, we open the door for them to take our guns and then our rights. And with nothing left to protect ourselves, our property or our families, we have no way of fighting back. NEVER give up.

  30. I don’t think any of it is constitutional but at best if someone has a service/therapy dog they are protected under the American disability Act and it does not make any difference what breed it is. Google the ACA and read what it states for service animals. We have a pit bull in our Condo community that is a service animal. We had some owners who went crazy when the lady bought the condo and moved in. I researched it and there is nothing we can do as it is protected as a service animal.

    1. Therapy dogs are not protected under the ADA. Service dogs, yes. Emotional Support Dogs (like Zeus) are protected under the Fair Housing Act and a few other laws as well, but not the ADA. Therapy dogs are not necessarily owned and handled by a disabled person (they are dogs that visit people in hospitals etc.) and so do not have public access or any other protection from the ADA or similar laws. Emotional Support dogs do not need special training, where as service dogs do.

      1. I dont know where you got your info but all animals categorized as a service animal (therapy, ESA, and Service animals) are protected under ADA and Fair Housing Act. I have an ESA. The Only difference with general Service Dogs and Therapy dogs is that one thing of permission in public spaces that is it, but, they ARE protected under ADA.

  31. I wonder if Moreauville officials will study the demographics of crime in the US and order the killing of all in their town that fit the demographic, regardless of individual history.

    1. Apparantly the town is “rethinking” its decision, as the mayor is in the hospital , likely stressed from the outcome of his idiocy.

      1. There are much bigger cities like Denver and Miami that are killing dogs by the thousands and yet have received nowhere near the press that this story about one dog in a small town has. I don’t doubt that this has put the mayor and other village officials under stress. What I want to know is how did this one dog get so much attention while others haven’t? The only bigger story I can think of was Lennox, a northern Irish dog who was sadly executed despite a global outcry. That is also a cautionary tale. The officials in Belfast reacted to the criticism by digging in their heels and refusing to listen to reason.

  32. This is absurd…..in this day and age, any dog can turn and bite someone. Enforce your leash laws please and leave this poor young girl with her dog!!!

  33. Gross misuse of power, completely stupid, utterly barbaric. Stopping now before I UNLEASH a whole lotta shit all over these assholes. I live in RI. Pawtucket just lifted their ban on breed specific dogs. These idiots in LA ought to look up what took place out here and follow the same level of intellect. I’d like a bit of a sit down discussion with these morons in so called power.

  34. over 200 years ago england enacted a law our for fathers did not like and we got rid of them,this is america not nazi germandy. it is our right to tell our leaders to go to hell if we choose to and it sounds to me by all the comments the heads of this town need to be told just that.get rid of them in the next election. enforce the leash laws.fine the morons that let their animals run loose, then the idiots that complained can take thier walk. my hat gose off to the bold vet clinicsdgaski

  35. This is a horrible choice made by the city. A few complain residence have the power to eliminate people’s closest companipns? !?! Any petition to eliminate this ordinance I am all for.
    FYI – German shepherds were remove from the “dangerous” dog list at least for Texas insurance.

  36. If this is the world i live in i don’t want to live, if someone killed Pleadies because of some blood thirsty holiday you’d have to kill me too, this girl needs this service dog in a bad way, how in the fuck can the system be so sick!

  37. This angers me beyond reason. I have volunteered in animal rescue for years and never had ANY issues with the many pits I have encountered. I was however seriously bitten by a German Shepherd,and another one of the same breed made an attempt to attack me. So they should include this breed in the ridiculous ban.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s