Pit Bull Laws Strengthened In Worcester, Massachusets
The City Council of Worcester, Massachusetts has given preliminary approval to ordinance that would impose stricter restrictions on owners of pit bull dogs. A decision will be made next month whether or not this ordinance will pass to state law.
The ordinance requires pit bull dogs to have a leash and a muzzle when they are not on or near their owner’s property. Pit bull owners are also required to place warning signs on their property and call authorities if their dog causes an injury to bystanders including other animals. This law also applies if their dog poses a potential threat to people or animals nearby, even if an attack has not occurred.
Setting these laws in place is a great idea in order to prevent dangerous animals from causing harm to innocent bystanders including other animals and even children. There have been many reports in the news about a child being attacked and mauled by a dog. This has not only occurred with pit bulls but other dogs as well. Setting laws to maintain dogs on a leash and muzzle will prevent the dog from attacking a person or another animal and causing very serious injuries. In many dog attack cases, victims often suffer serious bite injuries to their legs, neck, arms and face which can lead to several surgeries to repair the damage. In other cases, the bites can lead to infection and death if they are not treated properly and in a timely manner. Laws such as these instated by Massachusetts could easily prevent such cases from occurring.
For more information on the dangers of dog bites, visit Solomon & Relihan's Arizona Dog Bite website.
Since you are a law blog it might be wise to consider MA court cases here. The only case to address so called breed specific legislation in MA found it to be unconstitutionally vague. I would also like to know exactly who thinks laws like this could easily prevent dog attacks. The same ordinance was passed in Boston about 5 years ago and since then dog attacks have increased significantly. Furthermore, there is not a single professional organization to support such laws. Even the US CDC thinks such laws are a bad idea.
http://www.animallaw.info/cases/causma533ne2d642.htm
The ordinance requires pit bull dogs to have a leash and a muzzle when they are not on or near their owners property. The blog talked about leash laws and not laws restricting ownership.
The issue with the law is how the city determines what dogs are "pit bulls." It leaves police to make a determination that veterinarians cannot. The SJC found the description of a pit bull unconstitutionally vague.
I also would like to know who exactly thinks laws such as these could easily prevent dog attacks.